Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-9646.pdf
Page Number: 31.0

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

27 

Opinion of the Court 

to  imagine  a  judge  deciding  that  a  minor  deserves  a
(much) harsher sentence than he would receive in juvenile 
court,  while  still  not  thinking  life-without-parole  appro-
priate.  For that reason, the discretion available to a judge 
at  the  transfer  stage  cannot  substitute  for  discretion  at 
post-trial sentencing in adult court—and so cannot satisfy 
the Eighth Amendment. 

IV 
Graham,  Roper,  and  our  individualized  sentencing
decisions  make  clear  that  a  judge  or  jury  must  have  the
opportunity  to  consider  mitigating  circumstances  before 
imposing  the  harshest  possible  penalty  for  juveniles.    By
requiring  that  all  children  convicted  of  homicide  receive
lifetime incarceration without possibility of parole, regard-
less  of  their  age  and  age-related  characteristics  and  the 
nature of their crimes, the mandatory sentencing schemes
before  us  violate  this  principle  of  proportionality,  and  so
the  Eighth  Amendment’s  ban  on  cruel  and  unusual  pun-
ishment.  We  accordingly  reverse  the  judgments  of  the 
Arkansas Supreme Court and Alabama Court of Criminal 
Appeals and remand the cases for further proceedings not
inconsistent with this opinion. 

It is so ordered.