|Miller v. Alabama: The rights of the criminal prevail in the end|
With all eyes on the Supreme Court today, as a 5-3 decision rendered three of the four provisions of SB1070 invalid, the case of Miller v. Alabama received much less scrutiny. Evan Miller was a juvenile – unlike 60 % of those juveniles who receive life without parole that are Black, he is white – who was convicted of murder in 2003.
For that sentence, he was given life without parole. Until today:
The Supreme Court says it’s unconstitutional to sentence juveniles to life in prison without parole for murder, siding with the petitioner in case of Miller v. Alabama.
The high court on Monday threw out Americans’ ability to send children to prison for the rest of their lives with no chance of ever getting out. The 5-4 decision is in line with others the court has made, including ruling out the death penalty for juveniles and life without parole for young people whose crimes did not involve killing.
The Sentencing Project put together a survey of those juveniles serving life without parole; the finding were widely parroted in the Black press as proof of the US Justice Systems racism, but instead offered compelling evidence that Black people are – regardless of age – more prone to criminality than white people (coincidentally, this report lumped non-white ethnic Latinos with the “white” people in the race category, artificially driving up the white juvenile life-without-parole rate).
This decision by the SCOTUS is just another reminder that the law-abiding citizen in America – whom Peter Brimelow of Vdare.com correctly states the government is busy trying to dispossess in its bid to “elect a new new people” – are the real of federal government. Protecting their rights doesn’t matter anymore.
Recall that the EEOC decided that background checks for employment had a disparate impact upon Black people (and Brown people), because of the propensity for people with enriched levels of melanin to commit criminals acts — U.S. Puts Limits On Employee Background Checks To Protect Minorities:
Is an arrest in a barroom brawl 20 years ago a job disqualifier? Not necessarily, the government said Wednesday in new guidelines on how employers can avoid running afoul of laws prohibiting job discrimination.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s updated policy on criminal background checks is part of an effort to rein in practices that can limit job opportunities for minorities that have higher arrest and conviction rates than whites.
“The ability of African-Americans and Hispanics to gain employment after prison is one of the paramount civil justice issues of our time,” said Stuart Ishimaru, one of three Democrats on the five-member commission.
That data often can be inaccurate or incomplete, according to a report this month from the National Consumer Law Center. EEOC commissioners said the growing practice has grave implications for blacks and Hispanics, who are disproportionately represented in the criminal justice system and face high rates of unemployment.
“You thought prison was hard, try finding a decent job when you get out,” EEOC member Chai Feldblum said. She cited Justice Department statistics showing that 1 in 3 black men and 1 in 6 Hispanic men will be incarcerated during their lifetime. That compares with 1 in 17 white men who will serve time.