The Michigan Supreme Court is set to reexamine the life without parole sentences of three men who have spent two decades in prison, convicted of murder at ages 18, 19 and 20.

The justices will consider several factors, including the age and immaturity of the individuals, their family and home environment and the circumstances of the crimes. In 2022, the Court ruled mandatory no-parole sentences for 18-year-olds convicted of murder violated the state constitution's prohibition on "cruel or unusual" punishment. It will now decide whether to extend the ruling to 19- and 20-year-olds.

Quinn Yeargain, associate professor of law at Michigan State University, supports the court's decision to review the cases.

"There's a good amount of literature out there suggesting that people who are in their late teens and even going into their early twenties, their brains are not fully developed," Yeargain pointed out. "That's sort of the basis of this constitutional challenge."

Critics of reducing life sentences for young offenders argued it is contradictory to claim individuals old enough to vote, marry and obtain abortions without parental consent should not be held fully accountable for their serious crimes.

The high court will also look at how the offenders dealt with police and prosecutors and whether they can be rehabilitated and reintegrated into society. Yeargain emphasized it is not about giving someone a "get out of jail free card." He said Michigan's parole board, which operates within the Department of Corrections, is known for being overly cautious in ensuring individuals seeking parole have genuinely undergone rehabilitation.

"We're talking about people who are still going to be serving very long prison terms, and it's just a statement that maybe they'll be eligible for parole at a certain point," Yeargain emphasized. "If they're able to make a showing that they have changed, they have demonstrated remorse -- then they may be entitled to release at that point."

In Michigan, no-parole life sentences for those 18 or younger are no longer automatic. Judges review their background and potential for rehabilitation, while prosecutors must justify the sentence. The court plans to review the cases in the fall.


get more stories like this via email

In Mississippi, where thousands of people are serving life sentences, the impact of long-term imprisonment falls disproportionately on Black communities. Their advocates are raising concerns about the state's sentencing practices. And they're urging legislative reforms to reduce what they call "extreme sentences" and to address racial inequities in the system.

Celeste Barry, program associate with The Sentencing Project, co-authored a new report on the effects of long-term imprisonment. She said in Mississippi, more than 2,300 people are serving life sentences - and nearly three-quarters have no opportunity for parole.

"We see in Mississippi some extreme racial disparities that are far greater than the national average. So, over 70% of the life sentence population is Black in Mississippi, and that's compared to the still troubling 45% nationally" she explained.

Groups like hers are pushing for reforms to address these disparities. Barry highlights Oklahoma as an example, where the state passed the Domestic Violence Survivors Justice Act, allowing incarcerated individuals to seek reduced sentences if they can prove that abuse played a role in their crime.

Barry believes similar reforms could offer significant relief in Mississippi, especially given the state's disproportionately high number of women serving life sentences without parole.

"And this has the power to bring relief to hundreds of survivors in the state, and could be particularly meaningful in a state like Mississippi, where they have the largest share of their female life-sentenced population serving life without parole," she continued.

In 2021, Mississippi lawmakers passed a bipartisan bill to reduce the prison population by expanding parole opportunities for nonviolent offenders, but Gov. Tate Reeves vetoed it, citing public safety concerns.

Services for North Carolinians affected by the justice system is going mobile.

The Recidivism Reduction Educational Program Services mobile resource center is hitting the road today to provide reentry support across the state. It is the first effort of its kind.

Kerwin Pittman, founder and executive director of the organization, said the center will meet North Carolinians where they are, literally.

"What we wanted to do was bring a plethora of resources into these communities," Pittman explained. "Particularly communities that are highly impacted by recidivism and incarceration, and bring a wealth of resources to them to hopefully curb the recidivism rate."

The center had its unveiling and ribbon cutting on Tuesday and is starting in the Raleigh-Durham area today. Pittman pointed out it is the first of four units he hopes to have running by the end of the year. They will be located in different parts of the state and rotate throughout their region each week.

Pittman emphasized the units will be able to provide a long list of services.

"Some of those services range from social-benefit assistance to employment assistance to education and skill development to offering support and mental health services, substance misuse treatment and services, housing assistance, legal support, family and community support, digital literacy," Pittman outlined.

He added they will also provide inclement weather supplies, hygiene kits and local reentry resources through the organization's call center.

Places like NC Works Career Centers and other state services are able to provide local resources. But Pittman noted the services can be hard to access without a car, which can deter people.

"It's hard to walk in the cold to NC Works Center to sit in there and have to go through no telling what the intake process is, just to get whatever benefit that you may be trying to apply for or a resume or try to find a job," Pittman observed.

The battle over Jefferson County's 2021 redistricting maps heads to court this week with plaintiffs arguing the map violates the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution.

The case, McClure v. Jefferson County Commission, claims Black voters were unfairly packed into two districts, diluting their influence in others.

Zephyr Scalzetti, program specialist for Alabama Values, a nonprofit advocacy group focused on promoting civic engagement, pro-democracy policies and fair representation on issues such as voting rights and redistricting, said the case is about more than lines on a map; it is about ensuring every voter has an equal voice.

"You look at the map overall. Jefferson County residents are willing to elect Black representatives but it is impossible for a Black candidate to win in these three white districts," Scalzetti contended. "The plaintiffs are alleging that this is because those two supermajority Black districts are so packed with Black voters it is diluting their voice."

Jefferson County's five-district system was established in 1985. However, the lawsuit alleges that the 2021 maps are racially gerrymandered and haven't changed much since then. Districts 1 and 2 are still supermajority Black while Districts 3, 4 and 5 remain majority white, limiting influence despite the population of Black residents growing.

Scalzetti noted the case raises significant concerns about transparency in the redistricting process. The lawsuit alleges the commission failed to conduct analyses required by the Voting Rights Act, such as a racially polarized voting study. It also points to limited public input, with key meetings held during work hours and proposed maps only viewable in person at the commission's office.

Scalzetti emphasized the case highlights the importance of local redistricting in shaping representation and ensuring residents have a voice in decisions affecting their daily lives.

"Ultimately, this is about power," Scalzetti asserted. "This is about the power of a community, the power of an individual voter and a group of people to actually affect what is happening in their community."

The trial started on Monday and is taking place in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. It is expected to draw comparison to the landmark Supreme Court case Allen v. Milligan. Scalzetti added the case could have far-reaching impacts on redistricting, not only in other counties across Alabama but throughout the South.