Death Penalty: Constitutional Or Not?

The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, has been a topic of much debate and contention in the United States. While the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution forbids cruel and unusual punishment, it does not explicitly prohibit the death penalty. The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not violate the Eighth Amendment, but it has also placed restrictions and guidelines on its application. The Court has addressed issues such as arbitrary sentencing, discrimination, and procedural fairness, with landmark cases like Furman v. Georgia and McGautha v. California shaping the legal landscape surrounding capital punishment. Despite a growing trend towards abolition, the death penalty remains a contentious issue, with states retaining discretion in determining methods of execution.

Explore related products

Against the Death Penalty

$14.95 $16

Capital Punishment on Trial: Furman v. Georgia and the Death Penalty in Modern America (Landmark Law Cases and American Society)

$24.99 $99.99

The Death Penalty: Constitutional Issues, Commentaries, and Case Briefs

$43.91 $82.99

Arbitrary Death: A Prosecutor's Perspective on the Death Penalty

$9.99 $12.95

The Death Penalty (Concepts and Insights)

$45 $60

Cruel and Unusual

$24.99 $35

The Eighth Amendment and the death penalty

The Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects against excessive punishment and cruel and unusual punishments. The Amendment's language encapsulates fundamental principles of fairness in criminal justice. The Amendment requires that a punishment be proportionate to the crime for which it is imposed. This means that the death penalty is not prohibited by the Eighth Amendment, but it must be applied in a way that is not cruel or unusual.

The Supreme Court has ruled that a death sentence is not inherently cruel and unusual. However, it has handed down several decisions that define when and how the death penalty can be used. For example, in Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was disproportionate in a case involving the rape of a child. The Court reviewed state sentencing rules for child rape cases and determined that only six states allowed the death penalty for this crime. This was sufficiently rare to find that it violated the Eighth Amendment and should not be imposed at all.

In another case, McGautha v. California (1971), the Supreme Court addressed whether the death penalty could be imposed based on the jury's discretion without specific guidelines. The Court held that the death penalty was constitutional but underscored the importance of procedural safeguards to ensure fairness. The ruling laid the groundwork for future challenges to the death penalty based on the need for specific guidelines in capital sentencing.

The Eighth Amendment also applies to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. When reviewing an Eighth Amendment challenge, a court must decide whether a punishment is cruel or unusual according to evolving standards of decency in the community. They must consider objective factors that may show changes in social norms. For example, hanging and electrocution have not been invalidated on Eighth Amendment grounds, but lethal injection, the primary execution method in the U.S., has been upheld by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions.

Supreme Court cases and their influence

The Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, but it does not categorically ban the death penalty. The federal government can still impose capital punishment, and some states have retained these laws despite a growing trend toward abolition. The Supreme Court has emphasised that a sentence does not need to be strictly proportionate to the crime to meet constitutional requirements. However, it has limited capital punishment to a narrow range of crimes and prohibited its use on specific types of defendants.

Furman v. Georgia (1972)

Furman v. Georgia was a landmark case in which the Supreme Court decided that the arbitrary and inconsistent imposition of the death penalty violates the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, constituting cruel and unusual punishment. This decision invalidated the death sentences of nearly 700 people and mandated a degree of consistency in the application of the death penalty. It resulted in a de facto moratorium on capital punishment across the US, with dozens of states rewriting their death penalty laws.

Gregg v. Georgia (1976)

Following Furman v. Georgia, the Supreme Court upheld the revised death penalty laws of several states in Gregg v. Georgia. The Court determined that the new sentencing procedures in capital cases did not violate the Eighth Amendment as they addressed the issue of discrimination. The Court also noted that the death penalty does not inherently violate the Constitution, emphasising its role in deterring crime and providing retribution.

Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008)

In Kennedy v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was disproportionate in a case involving the rape of a child. This decision built upon previous rulings that established the principle of proportionality in criminal punishments, such as Trop v. Dulles, which solidified the idea that punishments must not exceed the bounds of decency and fairness established by the Eighth Amendment.

Baze v. Rees (2008)

In Baze v. Rees, the Supreme Court ruled that Kentucky's three-drug protocol for carrying out lethal injections did not amount to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. This case addressed the methods of execution used by states, which must not cause unnecessary suffering. While hanging and electrocution have not been invalidated on Eighth Amendment grounds, lethal injection, the primary execution method in the US, has been upheld by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions.

Roper v. Simmons (2005)

Roper v. Simmons is another significant case, in which the Supreme Court ruled that the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments forbid imposing the death penalty on offenders who were under 18 when their crimes were committed.

The evolving standard of decency

In Trop v. Dulles, the Court determined that the Eighth Amendment contained an "evolving standard of decency that marked the progress of a maturing society." This meant that as societal norms and standards of decency evolved, so too should the interpretation of the Eighth Amendment. This concept was later invoked in the context of the death penalty, with abolitionists arguing that society's standard of decency had progressed to a point where it should no longer tolerate the death penalty.

Explore related products

Mandatory Justice: Eighteen Reforms to the Death Penalty (The Constitution Project)

$10.25

Race, Rape, and Injustice: Documenting and Challenging Death Penalty Cases in the Civil Rights Era

$39.95 $34

Reflections on Life, Death, and the Constitution

$19 $20

Arbitrary and Capricious: The Supreme Court, the Constitution, and the Death Penalty

$67.5 $75

The death penalty in the Democratic Republic of Congo: Reflection on the fate of death row inmates after the promulgation of the constitution on 18/02/2006.

$65.13

Grace and Justice on Death Row: The Race against Time and Texas to Free an Innocent Man

$16.99 $24.99

Arbitrary and capricious sentencing

The Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution forbids "cruel and unusual punishment", but this does not rule out the death penalty in all cases. The federal government can still impose capital punishment, and some states have retained these laws, despite a general trend towards abolition.

The Eighth Amendment also requires that a punishment be proportionate to the crime. The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty should be limited to cases of homicide. For example, in Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), the Supreme Court held that the death penalty was disproportionate in a case involving the rape of a child. The Court reviewed state sentencing rules for child rape cases and found that only six states allowed the death penalty for this crime, which was sufficiently rare to find that it violated the Eighth Amendment.

The Supreme Court has also ruled that the death penalty does not inherently violate the Constitution, citing its role in deterring crime and providing retribution. However, the Court has also acknowledged that defendants from minority populations or impoverished backgrounds were disproportionately likely to receive capital punishment. In Furman v. Georgia, the Court determined that existing sentencing procedures in capital cases violated the Eighth Amendment because evidence showed that the death penalty was applied in discriminatory ways. This decision sparked a reevaluation of the death penalty and the need for specific guidelines in capital sentencing.

In summary, while the death penalty is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution, the Eighth Amendment places important restrictions on its application, including the requirement of proportionality and protection against arbitrary and capricious sentencing.

The role of states and their discretion

The Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishment, but it does not categorically ban the death penalty. The federal government can still impose capital punishment, and some states have retained these laws despite a growing trend towards abolition.

The Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause incorporates the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment, making it applicable to the states. This means that when reviewing an Eighth Amendment challenge, a court must decide if a punishment is cruel or unusual according to evolving standards of decency in the community. They must consider objective factors that indicate changes in societal norms.

The Supreme Court has played a significant role in interpreting the Eighth Amendment and its impact on the death penalty. In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Court invalidated existing death penalty laws, finding that they violated the Eighth Amendment by resulting in a disproportionate application of the death penalty, particularly discriminating against minority and impoverished communities. The Court also reasoned that the laws terminated life in exchange for marginal contributions to society. This case set a precedent for evaluating whether a punishment is "cruel and unusual" by considering its severity, arbitrariness, societal acceptance, and effectiveness compared to less severe penalties.

In response to Furman, several states revised their sentencing procedures in capital cases. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Court upheld these revised procedures, finding that they addressed the issue of discrimination and that the death penalty was not inherently unconstitutional. The Court emphasized the role of capital punishment in deterrence and retribution.

The Supreme Court has also provided clarifications on individualized sentencing jurisprudence. In Kansas v. Marsh (2006), the Court held that states could impose the death penalty when a jury finds aggravating and mitigating factors to be equally weighted, without violating the principle of individualized sentencing. The Court has also ruled on permissible methods of execution, upholding lethal injection as constitutional and applying an "objectively intolerable" test to determine if a method violates the Eighth Amendment.

While the Supreme Court has provided guidance and set standards, individual states still have substantial discretion in determining the methods of execution, as long as they do not cause unnecessary suffering. This discretion has resulted in variations in state sentencing rules, as seen in child rape cases, where only six states allowed the death penalty for this crime. The Supreme Court's rulings have influenced and shaped the application of the death penalty, but the specifics of its implementation vary across different states.

Frequently asked questions