Rex Bossert

The court has perhaps never been friendlier to criminal justice reform. This month, the Michigan Supreme Court announced that mandatory life-without-parole sentences for people under the age of 21 violate the state constitution’s ban on cruel or unusual punishment. The court also held, based on a separate recent decision, that this rule applies retroactively. These decisions are the latest from a court that’s been steadily carving out a path against excessive sentencing.

With the Trump administration looking to dismantle environmental protections, state attorneys general will play a critical role in protecting citizens from the harms of pollution and climate change. Over the past 20 years, state attorneys general have evolved into important policy players on issues like smoking, opioids, social media, and climate change. As the chief lawyer for the state, they have including proposing legislation and initiating suits on behalf of the state.

States have continued to pursue amendments requiring strict scrutiny for gun restrictions even after the Supreme Court turbocharged the Second Amendment with an originalist approach. The National Rifle Association led an effort in recent decades to amend state constitutions to expressly require that courts apply a “strict scrutiny” analysis to challenged gun laws. Do these amendments still matter since the Supreme Court strengthened Second Amendment protections beyond strict scrutiny?