Scott v. Pennsylvania Board of Parole

Scott v. Pennsylvania Board of Parole challenges the constitutionality of life without parole (LWOP) sentences for people convicted of felony-murder under Pennsylvania’s constitutional provision barring cruel punishments. Plaintiffs are seven people sentenced to die in prison even though they did not commit a murder—and some did not even know a murder was committed at all. They rely on precedent holding that LWOP is inappropriate for people with diminished culpability, like children, and argue that people convicted of felony-murder necessarily have diminished culpability for the death for which they are incarcerated.

We filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of ourselves and the ACLU of Pennsylvania outlining the racial justice implications of LWOP for felony-murder. To a shocking and disgusting degree, the sentence is disproportionately imposed upon Black Americans. To a shocking and disgusting degree, the sentence is disproportionately imposed upon Black Americans. That disparity is particularly dramatic in Pennsylvania, where 70 percent of those serving LWOP sentences for felony-murder are Black. Our brief explains that this disparity is repeated across the country, and is not limited to LWOP sentences or to this particular conviction—rather, across the board, Black people are stopped more frequently by police, charged more harshly for the same conduct, given fewer opportunities to plead down, and receive longer sentences. Next, the brief outlines the biases harbored by players in the criminal legal system and the systemic inequities that drive these disparities. The brief goes on to describe the collateral consequences of over-incarceration and unjustly long sentences for families and communities. Lastly, the brief discusses the crisis of legitimacy and erosion of institutional trust that accompany unfair sentencing schemes.

The brief reflects an early example of our new focus on state supreme courts as a forum to vindicate the rights of incarcerated people.