Biases & Vulnerabilities

Youth

Individuals under the age of 18 are exempt from the death penalty. Developments in brain science have renewed debate about whether young adults should also be excluded.

Overview

Children are not as cul­pa­ble as adults for their actions. In the death penal­ty con­text, that prin­ci­ple has caused debate about what age is too young for some­one to be sub­ject to exe­cu­tion. International human rights law has long pro­hib­it­ed the use of the death penal­ty against peo­ple who were younger than age 18 at the time of the offense. See Executions of Juveniles Outside of the U.S. In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court brought the U.S. into com­pli­ance with that inter­na­tion­al norm, rul­ing that the U.S. Constitution also pro­tects peo­ple from being sen­tenced to death for crimes com­mit­ted when they were under 18. For more infor­ma­tion, see the Roper v. Simmons Resource Page.

The Court had ear­li­er (1987) held that the prop­er age cut­off should be 16, but states grad­u­al­ly applied more strin­gent stan­dards to avoid con­flict with oth­er areas of the law where chil­dren were treat­ed dif­fer­ent­ly. By 2005, thir­ty states had either abol­ished the death penal­ty for all offend­ers or at least for those under the age of 18. As with its ear­li­er rul­ing exempt­ing defen­dants with intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ties, the Court found that a nation­al con­sen­sus had formed around exclud­ing those under 18, and that there was lit­tle to be gained in terms of deter­rence or ret­ri­bu­tion by exe­cut­ing younger offend­ers. Some Justices point­ed to the fact that the U.S. was vir­tu­al­ly alone in the world in allow­ing juve­nile offend­ers to be exe­cut­ed. The emerg­ing sci­ence of brain devel­op­ment also con­tributed to this decision.

At Issue

Debate now focus­es on whether 18 year olds should be held as respon­si­ble as adults for vio­lent crime. Some have sug­gest­ed that 21 would be a more appro­pri­ate age both because of the rights and respon­si­bil­i­ties con­ferred by soci­ety at that age and because new brain sci­ence shows that crit­i­cal areas of the brain relat­ing to judg­ment, impulse con­trol, and con­se­quen­tial think­ing do not mature until the mid-twen­ties. The Court’s ratio­nale on why it excludes juve­niles from death penal­ty eli­gi­bil­i­ty has been applied to oth­er deci­sions regard­ing the use of life-with­out-parole sen­tences for this same age group.

What DPIC Offers

DPIC has care­ful­ly mon­i­tored the flow of state leg­is­la­tion and court deci­sions regard­ing the appro­pri­ate age for the death penal­ty. The per­ti­nent Supreme Court deci­sion is ful­ly ana­lyzed. DPIC also makes avail­able the thor­ough research by oth­ers on the use of the death penal­ty for juve­niles in U.S. his­to­ry, with sta­tis­tics on sen­tences, exe­cu­tions, and the race of defendants.

News & Developments


News

May 06, 2025

New DPI Data Analysis: How Race Affects Capital Charging and Sentencing of 18 to 20-Year-Olds

In com­mem­o­ra­tion of the 20th anniver­sary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s land­mark deci­sion end­ing the juve­nile death penal­ty, the Death Penalty Information Center (DPI) has released a new report: Immature Minds in a​“Maturing Society”: Roper v. Simmons at 20, detail­ing the grow­ing sup­port for the idea that indi­vid­u­als ages 18, 19, and 20 should receive the same age-appro­pri­ate con­sid­er­a­tions that juve­niles now receive in death penal­ty cas­es. The report also reveals…

Read More

News

May 01, 2025

DPI’s Podcast 12:01 The Death Penalty in Context: Experts Discuss the Legacy of Roper v. Simmons

In this month’s pod­cast episode of 12:01: The Death Penalty in Context, DPI’s Managing Director Anne Holsinger speaks with Professors Craig Haney and Frank Baumgartner, and DPI’s Staff Attorney Leah Roemer about the lega­cy of the US Supreme Court’s deci­sion in Roper v. Simmons and the legal and sci­en­tif­ic land­scape sur­round­ing the use of the death penal­ty for young adults ages 1820. Professors Baumgartner and Haney, along with fel­low researcher Karen Steele,…

Read More

News

Apr 30, 2025

New DPI Report Examines the Legacy of Roper v. Simmons and Its Implications for 18- to 20-Year-Olds in Death Penalty Cases

In com­mem­o­ra­tion of the 20th anniver­sary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s land­mark deci­sion end­ing the juve­nile death penal­ty, the Death Penalty Information Center (DPI) today released a new report: Immature Minds in a​“Maturing Society”: Roper v. Simmons at 20, detail­ing grow­ing sup­port that indi­vid­u­als ages 18, 19, and 20 should receive the same age-appro­pri­ate con­sid­er­a­tions that juve­niles now receive in death penal­ty cas­es. > [T]here is no bright line regarding…

Read More

News

Apr 10, 2025

A Retreat from the Harshest Punishments for Emerging Adult Defendants

To com­mem­o­rate the 20th anniver­sary of the United States Supreme Court deci­sion that end­ed the juve­nile death penal­ty, DPI will release a report exam­in­ing the lega­cy of this deci­sion and its impli­ca­tions for emerg­ing adults. This arti­cle exam­ines one area of focus in the report: recent state courts deci­sions that have extend­ed legal pro­tec­tions to emerg­ing adults ages 18 to 20. In 2012, in Miller v. Alabama, the U.S. Supreme Court empha­sized that​“youth matters”…

Read More

News

Mar 31, 2025

Articles of Interest: Adverse Childhood Experiences, Their Effects on Mental Health, and the Connection to Legal System Involvement

This month marks the 20th anniver­sary of the land­mark U.S. Supreme Court deci­sion in Roper v. Simmons. In a series of posts antic­i­pat­ing the April 2025 release of DPI’s report com­mem­o­rat­ing the 20th Anniversary of the Roper deci­sion and its impli­ca­tions for emerg­ing adults , we are explor­ing sci­en­tif­ic and legal devel­op­ments relat­ed to juve­niles and emerg­ing adults in the death penal­ty sys­tem. Adverse child­hood expe­ri­ences (ACEs) refer to potentially…

Read More