吃瓜大本营

This case in the Mississippi Supreme Court is a post-conviction appeal of a pro se defendant, Mr. Soweto Love, who argued that his guilty plea was not entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently. The ACLU鈥檚 State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Mississippi, filed an amicus brief arguing that the law is on Mr. Love鈥檚 side, but urging the Court to exercise its discretion to inform Mr. Love that a win could resuscitate his charge and expose him to longer sentences. Consistent with the ACLU amicus brief, the Mississippi Supreme Court held that the trial court had plainly erred by misinforming Mr. Love that his applicable mandatory minimum was one year of imprisonment on each count to which he had pled guilty, when in in fact the mandatory minimum sentence was five years鈥� imprisonment on each count. The Court remanded Mr. Love鈥檚 case to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing.

Mississippi is home to one of the strictest felon disenfranchisement schemes in the nation. The Mississippi Constitution permanently disenfranchises citizens upon a single felony conviction for certain crimes, including minor offenses like writing a bad check. As a result, the loss of rights under Mississippi鈥檚 scheme is mandatory, permanent, and effectively irrevocable. In Hopkins, plaintiffs, a class of formerly incarcerated individuals who lost their right to vote despite completing their sentences, argued that their disenfranchisement violated the Eighth Amendment鈥檚 prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled in the plaintiffs鈥� favor and struck down Mississippi鈥檚 disenfranchisement scheme as cruel and unusual punishment. But the Fifth Circuit decided to rehear the case en banc, a rare occurrence in which a case is reconsidered by the entire panel of the circuit鈥檚 active judges.

Whether Mississippi鈥檚 1890 felony disenfranchisement law, adopted for the express purpose of disenfranchising Black voters, violates the Fourteenth Amendment鈥檚 Equal. Protection Clause.

Whether the Eighth Amendment requires a judge or jury to make a finding that a juvenile is 鈥減ermanently incorrigible鈥� before imposing a sentence of life without parole.