Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-9646.pdf
Page Number: 13

Cite as:  567 U. S. ____ (2012) 

9 

Opinion of the Court 

1014  (2003)).    And  in  Graham,  we  noted  that  “develop-
ments  in  psychology  and  brain  science  continue  to  show 
fundamental  differences  between 
juvenile  and  adult 
minds”—for  example,  in  “parts  of  the  brain  involved  in 
behavior control.”  560 U. S., at ___ (slip op., at 17).5  We 
reasoned  that  those  findings—of  transient  rashness,  pro-
clivity for risk, and inability to assess consequences—both 
lessened  a  child’s  “moral  culpability”  and  enhanced  the 
prospect  that,  as  the  years  go  by  and  neurological  devel-
opment occurs, his “ ‘deficiencies will be reformed.’ ”  Id., at 
___ (slip op., at 18) (quoting Roper, 543 U. S., at 570). 

Roper  and  Graham  emphasized  that  the  distinctive  at- 
tributes  of  youth  diminish  the  penological  justifications
for imposing the harshest sentences on juvenile offenders, 
even  when  they  commit  terrible  crimes.    Because  “ ‘[t]he
heart of the retribution rationale’ ” relates to an offender’s 
blameworthiness, “ ‘the case for retribution is not as strong
with  a  minor  as  with  an  adult.’ ”    Graham,  560  U. S.,  at 
___ (slip op., at 20–21) (quoting Tison v. Arizona, 481 U. S. 
137, 149 (1987); Roper, 543 U. S., at 571).  Nor can deter-
rence  do  the  work  in  this  context,  because  “ ‘the  same 
characteristics  that  render  juveniles  less  culpable  than 
adults’ ”—their  immaturity,  recklessness,  and  impetuos-
ity—make  them  less  likely  to  consider  potential  punish-

—————— 

5 The  evidence  presented  to  us  in  these  cases  indicates  that  the  sci-
ence  and  social  science  supporting  Roper’s  and  Graham’s  conclusions 
have  become  even  stronger.    See,  e.g.,  Brief  for  American  Psychologi-
cal  Association  et al.  as  Amici  Curiae  3  (“[A]n  ever-growing  body  of 
research  in  developmental  psychology  and  neuroscience  continues  to 
confirm  and  strengthen  the  Court’s  conclusions”);  id.,  at  4  (“It  is  in-
creasingly  clear  that  adolescent  brains  are  not  yet  fully  mature  in
regions and systems related to higher-order executive functions such as 
impulse  control,  planning  ahead,  and  risk  avoidance”);  Brief  for  J. 
Lawrence  Aber  et al.  as  Amici  Curiae  12–28  (discussing  post-Graham 
studies);  id.,  at  26–27  (“Numerous  studies  post-Graham  indicate  that 
exposure to deviant peers leads to increased deviant behavior and is a
consistent predictor of adolescent delinquency” (footnote omitted)).