It makes me wonder how they will reconcile it with today’s other ruling: no life without parole for young teens convicted of crimes that did not take life. So, if a teen is convicted of a sex crime, but nobody died…what the SCOTUS rulings combine to keep him for life anyhow?
Good point, Labrys, but my first thought was how far this labeling can be taken and how it could be used to imprison “inconvenient” persons.
They need to change the law and not give the government the “authority to hold people past their sentence”.
It makes me wonder how they will reconcile it with today’s other ruling: no life without parole for young teens convicted of crimes that did not take life. So, if a teen is convicted of a sex crime, but nobody died…what the SCOTUS rulings combine to keep him for life anyhow?
Good point, Labrys, but my first thought was how far this labeling can be taken and how it could be used to imprison “inconvenient” persons.
They need to change the law and not give the government the “authority to hold people past their sentence”.