Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-9646.pdf
Page Number: 62.0

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

7 

ALITO, J., dissenting 

sentences  that  may  be  imposed  in  criminal  cases,  but  for 
the most part it leaves questions of sentencing policy to be 
determined  by  Congress  and  the  state  legislatures—and 
with  good  reason.  Determining  the  length  of  imprison­
ment  that  is  appropriate  for  a  particular  offense  and  a
particular  offender  inevitably  involves  a  balancing  of  in­
terests. 
If  imprisonment  does  nothing  else,  it  removes
the  criminal  from  the  general  population  and  prevents
him  from  committing  additional  crimes  in  the  outside 
world.  When  a  legislature  prescribes  that  a  category  of 
killers must be sentenced to life imprisonment, the legisla­
ture,  which  presumably  reflects  the  views  of  the  elec­
torate,  is  taking  the  position  that  the  risk  that  these 
offenders  will  kill  again  outweighs  any  countervailing 
consideration, including reduced  culpability due to imma­
turity or the possibility of rehabilitation.  When the major­
ity  of  this  Court  countermands  that  democratic  decision,
what  the  majority  is  saying  is  that  members  of  society 
must  be  exposed  to  the  risk  that  these  convicted  murder­
ers, if released from custody, will murder again. 

Unless  our  cases  change  course,  we  will  continue  to
march  toward  some  vision  of  evolutionary  culmination 
that  the  Court  has  not  yet  disclosed.  The  Constitution 
does not authorize us to take the country on this journey.