Amicus Brief In the case of Montgomery v. Louisiana

Bert Hudson, #AP-1969

175 Progress Drive

Waynesburg, PA 15370

July 27th, 2015

The Honorable Justice of the

Supreme Court of the United States

United States Supreme Court Building

One First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543

Amicus Brief In the case of Montgomery v. Louisiana, No. 14-280

Re: The Inhumanity of Nonretroactivity

Greetings Honorable Justices,

Is “…justice for all” a reality in these Unites States of America?

Fairness is the cornerstone of justice. You have already decided it’s unconstitutional to impose mandatory life without parole sentences upon juveniles. Should this decision be applied retroactively to juveniles who are already suffering this grievous injustice? Absolutely.

If a cure for cancer were discovered, would it be fair to withhold it from everyone already dying of cancer and only give it people who develop cancer in the future? Absolutely not. To do otherwise would be like God not applying the ransom sacrifice of Jesus Christ retroactively to Noah, Abraham, Moses, David, Daniel, and everyone else who had already died. That is unthinkable.

When we outlawed slavery and child labor, we humanely applied these decisions retroactively to all the slaves and children who were already suffering these grievous injustices. To have done otherwise would have been unconscionable.

The inhumanity of those who oppose applying your decisions retroactively is appalling. Outwardly these very ones may appear righteous, but, inside, they are full of hypocrisy and injustice. If they were juveniles suffering the grievous injustice of mandatory life sentences, they would undoubtedly support applying your decision in Miller retroactively. This is hypocrisy, injustice, and inhumanity.

As we hope and pray such ones reach the level of humanity necessary to put themselves in the shoes of others and apply the Golden Rule of treating others as we would want others to treat us, it is incumbent upon us to seek justice for all.  Making your decisions retroactive would be a giant step in redressing many injustices.

Our Congress and the General Assemblies of some state have made laws stating your decisions are not retroactive unless you say so, which limits, restricts, and sometimes even bans the right of people to petition the government for a redr3ess of grievances.  It’s a wonder you haven’t already checked this unconstitutional imbalance since the very first Amendment to our U.S. Constitution clearly states, “Congress shall make no law respecting…the right of the people…to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

“Redress” Inherently implies retroactivity. So, unless you must say otherwise, all of your decisions in criminal cases should automatically apply retroactively even more so that actively and proactively to redress the grievances of people who are already unjustly suffering from a grievous violation of their constitutional rights.

Sometimes, justice gets lost in a multitude of laws. So, may your decisions always be in accordance with the Golden Rule. After all, this is the spirit of humanity and our United States Constitution.



Bert Hudson

Not a Juvenile Lifer