PDF Summary:Just Mercy, by Bryan Stevenson

Over a half-century after the civil rights movement sought justice for African Americans, prominent movements such as Black Lives Matter continue fighting to expose and resist injustice. In this social landscape, Bryan Stevenson’s message is timely: The US justice system consistently denies justice to society’s most vulnerable members.

In his 2014 book, Just Mercy, Stevenson examines the justice system’s pervasive failures toward marginalized populations, especially Black Americans. To illustrate these failures, Stevenson discusses numerous criminal cases, most prominently the 1989 case of Walter McMillian, a Black man wrongly convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Alabama.

In this guide, we’ll discuss Stevenson’s analysis of the McMillian case and his evidence of extreme punishments doled out more broadly by the justice system. Moreover, we’ll consider Stevenson’s diagnosis of the root problems with the American conception of justice and his suggestions for repairing it. We’ll also examine arguments from other sources about how to improve the justice system and provide further context for the cases that Stevenson cites.

(continued)...

In the Rule 32 hearing, Stevenson presented new evidence of McMillian’s innocence. In particular, he called Myers to the stand, who recanted his original testimony. He also called multiple witnesses who spent time in jail with Myers, whom Myers previously told that his original testimony was fabricated. Crucially, Stevenson presented tapes of Myers in police custody, where Sheriff Tate threatened him if he didn’t testify against McMillian, despite Myers protesting that he had nothing to do with the Morrison murder.

(Shortform note: While cases in state appellate courts permit review of records from the initial trial, Alabama’s Rule 32 allows for habeas corpus petitions, which can introduce information not mentioned in the original trial. In other words, Rule 32 petitions allow defendants to present new evidence establishing their innocence, which generally isn’t presented in appellate hearings.)

Nonetheless, the presiding judge denied McMillian relief, claiming there wasn’t sufficient evidence that Myers’s original testimony was fabricated. Consequently, Stevenson sought to appeal the decision in the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals.

Meanwhile, Stevenson notes that the new DA—Tom Chapman—had grown doubtful of McMillian’s guilt, ordering an Alabama Bureau of Investigation (ABI) inquiry into the crime. Six months later, ABI investigators revealed their findings: McMillian didn’t kill Ronda Morrison. Six weeks after the ABI’s report, the Court of Criminal Appeals released its verdict: McMillian was wrongly convicted, and he deserved a new trial.

(Shortform note: Appellate courts are generally reticent to overturn the rulings of lower courts: In 2016, for instance, fewer than 7% of criminal appeals were successful. So, McMillian’s success in winning his appeal was somewhat anomalous.)

In light of the ABI’s report, however, DA Chapman chose not to re-prosecute McMillian. Rather, the State supported Stevenson’s motion to dismiss all charges against McMillian, leading to his immediate release. On March 2nd, 1993—nearly six years after his original arrest—McMillian was exonerated and released from prison.

(Shortform note: McMillian’s six years behind bars—though an undoubtedly long duration for a crime he didn’t commit—is less than the average amount of time spent in prison for exonerated death row survivors; researchers estimate that the average death row exoneree spends over 11 years in prison before exoneration.)

The Aftermath of Six Years on Death Row

Despite his exoneration, McMillian’s conviction and time in prison had lasting consequences. Indeed, Stevenson argues that McMillian’s unjust conviction caused him irreversible damage.

First, McMillian’s wife, Winnie, decided to separate from him, so he lived alone in a trailer in Monroe County after his release.

(Shortform note: Winnie’s decision to leave McMillian is representative of a larger trend, as researchers have found that incarcerations during a marriage makes divorce about twice as likely. Further, they found that the likelihood of divorce grows over 30% for each additional year behind bars.)

Moreover, although Stevenson filed a civil lawsuit against those involved in McMillian’s prosecution—like Sheriff Tate, the other investigators, and the DA—laws protecting state agents from civil liabilities made it difficult to win compensation. Altogether, McMillian received only a few hundred thousand dollars to compensate for six years imprisoned on death row.

(Shortform note: McMillian’s inability to win a civil suit against prosecutors stems from Imbler v. Pachtman, a 1976 case heard by the US Supreme Court. The Court unanimously ruled that prosecutors have absolute immunity from civil liabilities for actions committed in their role as prosecutors—even if they intentionally withheld information or knowingly used perjured testimony. In defense of this ruling, the Court argued that leaving prosecutors liable to civil suits would hinder their ability to work effectively, since they would constantly be defending against ill-founded lawsuits.)

Finally, Stevenson recalls that as McMillian grew older, he developed trauma-induced dementia, requiring constant care. However, because he was convicted of a felony, few nursing homes would accept him—even though he was exonerated. Further, though one nursing home let McMillian stay for 90 days, he suffered hallucinations of death row while there. Although he was released from death row, McMillian’s memories of it left him permanently scarred.

(Shortform note: McMillian’s trauma from his incarceration is hardly atypical; in a 2019 review of research studies, experts found that prisoners experience disproportionately high rates of potentially traumatic events (PTEs) during incarceration. Moreover, they found a statistically significant correlation between PTEs—especially time spent in solitary confinement—and post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) among inmates.)

Mass Incarceration and Excessive Punishment

Stevenson discusses McMillian’s case throughout Just Mercy. However, he also examines other cases of unjust punishment, revealing a common theme: The US justice system consistently doles out extreme punishments to the most vulnerable Americans. In this section, we’ll discuss four demographics that Stevenson finds susceptible to unjust punishments: children, the intellectually disabled and mentally ill, veterans, and women.

Extreme Punishments of Children

To begin, Stevenson argues that unjust punishments of children became the norm in the ‘90s. According to Stevenson, faulty predictions by criminologists led to excessive punishments of children, especially children of color.

Stevenson notes that in the late ‘80s, criminologists predicted that “super predators”—violent children without remorse—would inundate the juvenile justice system. He argues that widespread panic consequently gripped the justice system, leading to increased prosecution of children as adults and harsh punishments.

The Origins and Consequences of the Super Predator Theory

In 1995, Princeton political scientist John Dilulio Jr. penned “The Coming of the Super Predators,” an essay which sparked the super predator myth. In particular, Dilulio argued that increasing rates of youth violence—especially among Black males—were indicative of an imminent wave of “super predators” who killed gratuitously. Additionally, he cited anecdotal evidence that juvenile detention facilities seemed more dangerous, chock-full of remorseless young predators.

However, Dilulio’s theory was widely discredited, as the rates of youth crimes—including violent crimes—dropped significantly between 1995 and 1999. Indeed, Dilulio himself even renounced the theory, admitting that he wished he had instead focused on crime prevention.

Yet, the damage of the super predator myth was lasting, as media embraced the alarmist theory, stoking the flames of public concern. Indeed, politicians such as Hillary Clinton announced their worry about these “super predators,” and nearly every state enacted laws making it easier to try children as adults and impose harsher punishments on them. Consequently, experts argue that our justice system still bears the legacy of this myth, as thousands of children remain in prison for sentences doled out under the influence of the super predator scare.

According to Stevenson, the fear of super predators led to a troubling trend: Judges reactively condemn children to die in prison, robbing them of the potential for rehabilitation.

Trina Garnett illustrates this trend. The daughter of an abusive, alcoholic father, Garnett fled her home at a young age, sometimes staying with family and sometimes homeless. At age 14, as Stevenson recounts, Garnett climbed through the window into the house of some nearby boys, carrying a match to light her way. After accidentally dropping the match, however, she lit the house aflame, ultimately asphyxiating the two boys.

(Shortform note: The decision to run away in the wake of abuse is common, as researchers have long recognized that child abuse, and sexual abuse in particular, is the most frequent catalyst of youth runaways. Moreover, youth runaways demonstrate disproportionately high rates of incarceration; one 2016 study found that 44% of runaway and homeless youth had spent time in jail, prison, or a juvenile detention center.)

Despite her lack of intent, Garnett was tried as an adult and convicted of 2nd-degree murder. Moreover, due to uncompromising laws that don’t consider intent, the judge sentenced Garnett to life in prison, without the possibility of parole.

(Shortform note: In addition to her lack of intent, the court-appointed psychiatrist found that Garnett suffered from intellectual disability, remarking that her answers to his questions made “no sense at all.” He further noted that she likewise suffered from schizophrenia, but neither of these diagnoses affected Garnett’s sentence.)

Extreme Punishments of the Intellectually Disabled and Mentally Ill

Stevenson also discusses how the justice system treats individuals with intellectual disabilities and mental illness. He argues that the evidence is clear: The US Justice System disproportionately imprisons the intellectually disabled and mentally ill, even though prisons exacerbate mental illness.

At the 2014 publication of Just Mercy, Stevenson notes that more than 50% of US prison inmates have been diagnosed with a mental illness—five times the general population’s rate. Further, because guards aren’t trained to address mental illness, they mistreat prisoners with mental illnesses. For example, rather than receiving needed care, prisoners are regularly placed in solitary confinement, where their conditions worsen.

(Shortform note: Although mental illness is rampant in prison, prisoners often fail to receive adequate treatment. Indeed, a 2017 study found that only 36% of prisoners suffering from mental illness actively received treatment. Moreover, the prevalence of co-pays for medical care exacerbates this issue; all federal prisons, and 40 states, charge prisoners a co-pay for initiating medical treatment, which disincentivizes the mentally ill from seeking help.)

To illustrate, Stevenson discusses Joe Sullivan, who was sentenced to life without parole for a crime he didn’t commit as an intellectually disabled 13 year-old. At 13, Sullivan burglarized Lena Bruner’s empty house with two older boys in 1989. According to Stevenson, another man entered the house later that day when Bruner was home, violently raping her. She could only describe her rapist as African-American, and the older boys were quickly apprehended by police.

To earn leniency with the judge, the older boys claimed that Sullivan—who freely turned himself in—had raped Bruner. Though he confessed to the burglary, Sullivan denied committing sexual battery, and Bruner couldn’t positively identify him. Moreover, though the police collected DNA evidence of the rape, they destroyed it before trial, making it impossible to exculpate Sullivan.

(Shortform note: Because Bruner didn’t clearly see her assailant’s face, her testimony focused on Sullivan’s voice in particular. After listening to Sullivan speak, Bruner ultimately testified that “It’s hard, but it does sound similar.” Thus, a key piece of evidence driving Sullivan’s conviction was the assertion that his voice was merely “similar” to that of Bruner’s assailant.)

Despite lacking credible evidence, prosecutors tried Sullivan as an adult and he was sentenced to life without parole. In prison, he was raped repeatedly by older inmates and became suicidal. He would later develop multiple sclerosis, possibly as a result of severe trauma, and require a wheelchair. Consequently, Stevenson observes that Sullivan’s condition grew drastically worse through his experience in prison.

(Shortform note: It’s possible that the repeated sexual abuse Sullivan suffered in prison also played a part in his developing multiple sclerosis, as one 2022 study found that childhood abuse is associated with an increased risk of developing multiple sclerosis. In particular, researchers found the strongest link between sexual abuse suffered as a child and multiple sclerosis onset later in life.)

Extreme Punishments of Veterans

In a similar vein, Stevenson argues that the US Justice System disproportionately imprisons traumatized veterans, who can’t smoothly return to society after their service has scarred them.

For example, Stevenson notes that 20% of the incarcerated population in the 1980s had served time in the military. This disproportionate rate, he suggests, was the result of the Vietnam War: Soldiers that brought home war trauma were most likely to end up incarcerated. Consequently, though Stevenson concedes that the rate dropped in the ‘90s, he notes it has started to increase as a result of war in Afghanistan and Iraq.

(Shortform note: Thus far, Stevenson’s suggestion that the rate of incarcerated veterans could start to increase hasn’t panned out: In 2012, veterans accounted for 6.2% of the US’s prison population, whereas in 2018 that rate dropped slightly to 6.0%, followed by a low of 5.6% in 2021. So, it seems the percentage of incarcerated veterans has actually dropped in the most recent decade. Experts credit this decrease in part to services such as “veterans courts,” which offer veterans psychological treatment instead of jail time for some offenses.)

To demonstrate the system’s failure toward veterans, Stevenson recounts the story of Herbert Richardson, a traumatized Vietnam War veteran. Suffering from severe post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), Richardson began dating a nurse in Alabama and grew obsessed with her. However, she recognized his obsession and tried to sever the relationship.

Richardson’s reasoning, Stevenson writes, became faulty and deluded. Consequently, he built a small bomb to detonate on his ex-girlfriend’s porch, planning to win her affection by rescuing her after the explosion. However, his ex-girlfriend’s niece found the bomb first and decided to shake it; she was killed instantly by the explosion.

How Trauma Harms Veterans’ Ability to Form Relationships

In The Body Keeps the Score, Bessel van der Kolk explores the lasting effects of trauma on survivors’ bodies and brains. With respect to veterans in particular, he argues that they constantly replay traumatizing wartime episodes—such as bomb detonations, gunfire, and friends’ deaths—which perpetuates the cycle of trauma. Because these flashbacks can occur at any time, van der Kolk notes that they can be more harmful than the original event, which at least had a definitive end.

To avoid these painful flashbacks, veterans often fixate on some distraction, whether it’s the gym, drugs, or—in Richardson’s case—a romantic partner. However, because traumatized veterans have experienced severe harm from other humans, their capacity for trust and intimate connection is hindered. Consequently, veterans can experience deep-seated feelings of isolation, leading them to act dangerously; in Richardson’s case, this trauma-induced isolation may have fueled his obsession with his ex-girlfriend.

Additionally, experts argue that veterans are often hesitant to seek treatment for PTSD because of stigma against mental illness that’s especially prevalent in the military. Nonetheless, others note that cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) has proven effective in treating PTSD among combat veterans, and the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) provides an array of treatment options for traumatized veterans.

At trial, the prosecution argued that Richardson was evil, rather than recognizing that trauma had made him mentally unstable. Further, Stevenson mentions that the prosecution claimed Richardson had intended to kill, making the crime punishable with the death penalty.

Meanwhile, because Alabama law only paid public defenders $1,000 for preparation time, Richardson’s counsel—who was later disbarred—didn’t research any mitigating factors, like his military tenure and lasting trauma. So, after a one-day trial, the judge sentenced Richardson to death. Despite Stevenson’s best efforts to get a stay of execution, the sentence was carried out: Richardson was executed via electric chair in August of 1989. As he walked to his death, the prison played the hymn, “The Old Rugged Cross,” per his final request.

(Shortform note: Although executions via electric chair have become less common, with some state supreme courts deeming it cruel and unusual punishment, it remains an option for prisoners to request in eight states. Indeed, Governor Henry McMaster even made the electric chair the default method in South Carolina in 2021, though a South Carolina judge ruled it unconstitutional in 2022.)

Extreme Punishments of Women

Finally, Stevenson examines how women fare in the justice system, and finds a similar result: Women—especially impoverished ones—are frequently subject to cruel and unjust punishments.

First, Stevenson notes that the rate of incarcerated women is growing quicker than that of incarcerated men. Between 1980 and 2010, he observes that the amount of women in prison increased 646%—about 1.5 times the rate of increase for men. This increased incarceration, Stevenson argues, has systemic effects: Over 75% of women in prison have young children, who become more likely to end up in prison without a maternal caregiver.

(Shortform note: According to experts, it’s unclear why the rate of incarcerated women has increased quicker than that of incarcerated men. However, data suggests that the so-called “War on Drugs” is responsible for many of these incarcerations—in 2019, 26% of women in state prisons were convicted of drug crimes, compared to 13% of men.)

To illustrate this trend, Stevenson discusses the case of Marsha Colbey, a poor mother of six from rural Alabama. In the wake of Hurricane Ivan in 2004, which destroyed Colbey’s home, she became pregnant at age 43 but couldn’t afford to see a doctor. Consequently, Stevenson observes she wasn’t aware of a placental abruption cutting off oxygen to her unborn child. Months later, Colbey delivered a stillborn son in her bathtub, and her attempts to revive him failed. However, due to a nosy neighbor, police were notified that Colbey was no longer pregnant and suspected that she had murdered her newborn child.

(Shortform note: In addition to the pain of being falsely accused of murdering her child, Colbey was likely still processing the trauma of her stillbirth when police arrested her. After all, experts note that stillbirth is a deeply traumatizing experience for many women, on par with that of combat veterans.)

After exhuming the infant’s body, state forensic pathologist Kathleen Enstice—who had a track record of mistakenly declaring deaths to be homicides—asserted that the baby was born alive and subsequently drowned. Despite several medical experts discrediting Enstice’s assessment at trial, Colbey was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to life without parole. This conviction, Stevenson notes, won the praise of local media, which often sensationalized high-profile cases of mothers allegedly killing their children.

Stevenson eventually won Colbey a new trial by appealing to the Alabama Supreme Court, and various expert pathologists testified that Enstice’s original assessment was incorrect. In turn, authorities decided not to re-prosecute. Still, the damage was done: Colbey had spent 10 years in prison because she couldn’t afford medical care during her pregnancy.

(Shortform note: Researchers find that exonerees face a host of problems upon their release. For example, their time in prison often deprives them of the social skills needed to re-enter society, leaves them financially destitute, and results in PTSD that requires further treatment upon release.)

Steps Toward Progress: Confronting Ignorance and Legal Hurdles

Despite the justice system’s failure toward society’s most vulnerable, Stevenson suggests that progress is possible, both in public understanding of justice and in the legal system’s conception of just punishment. In this section, we’ll first examine the four institutions that Stevenson argues have distorted our understanding of justice, then we’ll discuss more specific legal challenges that illustrate the possibility of progress.

Correcting our Understanding of Justice

According to Stevenson, four institutions have affected our view of justice, especially in relation to race: slavery, convict leasing, the Jim Crow era, and mass incarceration. He argues that these institutions have corrupted our understanding of justice, explaining society’s complacency with unjust punishments.

(Shortform note: It bears mentioning that, throughout Just Mercy, Stevenson implicitly likens the plight of enslaved Black people to that of imprisoned Black people today. Though he doesn’t go as far as other experts, who argue that mass incarceration amounts to modern-day slavery, he remains aware of the parallels between the subjugation of Black people via slavery and their disproportionate subjugation via mass incarceration today.)

Institution #1: Slavery

First, Stevenson claims that slavery—and its legacy of racial terror, in which Black men were publicly lynched throughout the South—has influenced our conception of justice. In particular, he argues that frequent lynchings of Black men led to the modern death penalty, as it redirected the ire of white southerners that previously culminated in lynchings. By recognizing this connection, Stevenson implies that we can help undermine the broad public support for capital punishment.

(Shortform note: The term “lynching” has long eluded straightforward definition, as activists struggled to settle on a single definition. However, in 1940, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) and other activist groups agreed that lynching was an extrajudicial killing done “under the pretext of service to justice, race, or tradition.” On this definition, some contemporary murders of Black men—such as Ahmaud Arbery, who was chased down and murdered under the false pretense that he was a burglar—qualify as lynchings.)

Institution #2: Convict Leasing

Next, Stevenson discusses convict leasing—the practice of convicting former slaves of frivolous crimes to lease them to private businesses while incarcerated. Convict leasing, Stevenson argues, has effectively led to the re-enslavement of former slaves. Consequently, he implies that it’s responsible for our complacency with the modern prison labor system, in which prisoners work for little to no wages.

(Shortform note: States can compel prisoners to work for free because of a so-called “slavery loophole” in the Thirteenth Amendment, which prohibits slavery and involuntary solitude except as a punishment for a convicted crime. In November of 2022, however, four states—Alabama, Oregon, Tennessee, and Vermont—voted to remove this loophole from their respective state constitutions, signaling support for a movement to change the Thirteenth Amendment itself.)

Institution #3: The Jim Crow Era

Additionally, Stevenson argues that we fail to recognize the legacy of the Jim Crow Era, in which state laws legalized racial segregation. In particular, he observes that while we readily acknowledge the achievements of the civil rights movement, we don’t acknowledge the lasting harm that segregation causes by inflicting daily insults and humiliation on Black people. In turn, he suggests that to understand the discrimination that currently underlies the justice system, we must understand these lasting harms.

(Shortform note: In The New Jim Crow, Michelle Alexander argues that the War on Drugs—a government initiative beginning in the 1970s that purported to stop the use and distribution of illegal drugs—furthers the segregation of the Jim Crow Era under the guise of punishing criminals. Specifically, she argues that despite equal levels of drug use in Black and white communities, Black people are arrested disproportionately for drug crimes. Consequently, she claims that the War on Drugs sequesters Black people in prisons, turning them into second-class citizens just like in the original Jim Crow Era.)

Institution #4: Mass Incarceration

Lastly, Stevenson argues that mass incarceration has made us complacent with the disproportionate imprisonment of people of color, as well as unjust practices like the targeting of impoverished communities for drug crimes. To fully grasp the shortcomings of our justice system, he implies we must reckon with the reality of mass incarceration.

More Concrete Steps To Improve the US Justice System

Many of Stevenson’s suggestions for creating a just society are abstract, focusing on how we can better understand the underpinnings of our current justice system. But other authors, such as Ibram X. Kendi and Michelle Alexander, provide more actionable advice to supplement Stevenson’s ideas.

In How to Be an Antiracist, for instance, Kendi offers various strategies to combat racial inequality at the individual level. These strategies include:

• Participate in protests against unjust policies, or demonstrations to raise awareness about such policies.

• Vote against policymakers that support unjust policies, and instead support politicians committed to overthrowing unjust systems.

• Commit to educating the public about the racial inequality that underlies many unjust systems.

In The New Jim Crow, on the other hand, Alexander endorses broader policy changes to fight the structural inequalities in the justice system. Her recommendations include:

• Fund public defenders to the same extent as prosecutors to prevent incompetent representation.

• Establish better drug treatment programs for addicts and better re-entry programs for the formerly incarcerated.

• Remove the financial incentives that perpetuate the current system, such as employers’ reliance on convict labor.

Challenging Extreme Punishments of Children

Although Stevenson argues that our conception of justice has been distorted, he concedes that there has been some progress: After hearing Stevenson’s arguments, the US Supreme Court ruled that sentencing children to life without parole for non-homicide offenses is unconstitutional.

First, Stevenson notes that in 2005, the US Supreme Court found it unconstitutional to punish children with the death penalty, citing fundamental differences between children and adults that made children less culpable. In turn, this ruling provided a foundation for challenging juvenile life-without-parole sentences

To challenge such sentences, Stevenson had to argue they were cruel and unusual, thus violating the Eighth Amendment.

What Counts as Cruel and Unusual Punishment?

The prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments stems from the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution. However, because the authors of the Constitution didn’t explicitly define the phrase “cruel and unusual,” debate rages on regarding the proper interpretation and application of this injunction.

On the one hand, so-called originalists—those who hold that the Constitution should be interpreted according to its authors’ original intent—argue that punishment violates the Eighth Amendment if and only if it would be considered cruel and unusual by the prevailing standards in 1791, when the Constitution was written. Consequently, originalists such as Antonin Scalia argue that capital punishment is constitutionally permissible, as it was considered neither cruel nor unusual in 1791.

By contrast, certain non-originalists hold that the Constitution derives meaning from our changing understanding of its terms. For example, in 1958’s Trop v. Dulles, Chief Justice Earl Warren ruled that the Eighth Amendment derives meaning from “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.” Consequently, non-originalists—like Stevenson himself—are more likely to argue that capital punishment violates the Eighth Amendment, since it violates our evolving understanding of decency.

According to Stevenson, such sentences were cruel because they didn’t consider children’s diminished culpability. He cited evidence from neurology, psychology, and sociology suggesting that children suffer from impaired judgment and are especially susceptible to negative influences. Moreover, he argued that increased dopamine receptivity leads to increased risk-taking around puberty, meaning they’re vulnerable to making poor decisions. These factors, Stevenson claims, reflect something we already recognize: Children lack the capacity for mature decisions that adults have.

(Shortform note: In addition to Stevenson, philosophers generally agree that children are not fully morally responsible for their actions. According to some theorists, this is because children lack normative competency—in other words, they can’t grasp and apply moral norms to the same degree that adults can. Consequently, their diminished responsibility makes punitive punishment inappropriate.)

Because their judgment is impaired, children are less culpable for their actions. Consequently, Stevenson argued, sentencing them to life without parole constitutes cruel punishment. However, Stevenson notes that punishment must also be unusual to violate the Constitution; because 2,500 children in the US were sentenced to life without parole, it proved harder to argue that such punishments were unusual.

So, Stevenson focused on a narrower subset—the 200 children sentenced to life without parole for non-homicide offenses, like Joe Sullivan. Despite initial resistance from lower courts, the US Supreme Court decided to review Stevenson’s case in 2009. Later, in 2010, they delivered their ruling in Graham v. Florida: It’s unconstitutional to sentence children who didn’t commit homicides to life without parole.

(Shortform note: Stevenson’s approach is consistent with incrementalism, the view that change is best effected via incremental steps. However, some have argued that while incrementalism accurately describes how change has occurred in US history, it’s not the best theory of how change should occur going forward. In particular, these researchers claim that because incrementalism yields only small progress, while accepting large injustices, it’s not justifiable by cost-benefit analyses.)

Likewise, in 2012’s Miller v. Alabama, the court found mandatory sentences of life without parole unconstitutional for child offenders. In turn, people like Trina Garnett became eligible for resentencing, no longer condemned to die in prison. According to Stevenson, the ruling provided hope that many children sentenced to life could re-enter society. (Shortform note: After Just Mercy’s publication in 2014, it still took five years for Garnett to be released—she was resentenced in 2018 and released in 2019.)