Now with the possibility of parole: Enabling a juvenile lifer's meaningful review.

This article examines how parole boards in one U.S. state justify granting or denying parole to juvenile lifers—individuals sentenced to life without parole (LWOP) for first-degree murder committed as adolescents—following Supreme Court rulings that mandate a meaningful opportunity for release based on "Miller factors." These factors include considerations of a juvenile’s immaturity, family environment, peer influence, participation in the crime, and rehabilitative potential. Analyzing 33 written parole decision statements from initial hearings between 2014 and 2018, the study finds that granting parole often hinges on narratives emphasizing childhood abuse, peer dependency, and demonstrated rehabilitation, while denials focus on the severity and “horrific” nature of the offense and question the candidate’s credibility or remorse. The findings highlight a selective and symbolic use of Miller factors by parole boards, where reduced culpability and rehabilitation are acknowledged but frequently outweighed by offense-based considerations, underscoring tensions between Supreme Court mandates and parole board discretion in discretionary release decisions for juvenile lifers.