Court Ruling on Juveniles - NYTimes.com Re "Mandatory Life Terms Barred for Juveniles in Murder Cases" (front page, June 26): The Supreme Court's banning of mandatory life imprisonment for juveniles in its recent decision in Miller v. Alabama was an important and appropriate legal step. The decision reinforces what the court previously recognized in abolishing the death penalty for juveniles and life imprisonment for juvenile nonhomicide offenses: that children are prone to immature and reckless behavior, and are likely to rehabilitate with age. Their sentences need to take into consideration these "hallmark features" of youth, as the decision stated. It is now important to ensure that the spirit of the ruling is upheld. The individuals entitled to relief should be resentenced in a manner that provides a meaningful opportunity to demonstrate maturity and obtain release. Many do not have attorneys and will need effective legal representation. Resentencing should also be free from considerations of race. A majority of those originally sentenced to juvenile life without parole were children of color. The court's decision to ban these unduly harsh mandatory punishments strengthens the fairness of our criminal justice system. The writer is a professor and supervising attorney of the Juvenile Defender Clinic at New York University School of Law.