Malcolm Rivera
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, has been the subject of much debate in the United States, with Congress and state legislatures authorized to prescribe it for crimes deemed capital offenses. The Supreme Court has played a pivotal role in shaping its constitutionality, with landmark cases such as Furman v. Georgia in 1972, which invalidated existing death penalty laws, and Gregg v. Georgia in 1976, where the Court ruled that the death penalty was not inherently unconstitutional, setting a precedent for future capital punishment cases. The Court's decisions have refined the requirements for aggravating factors, individualized sentencing, and the methods of execution, all while addressing issues of arbitrariness and discrimination. The death penalty's constitutionality continues to evolve, with a growing legislative trend towards abolition in recent years.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Year | 1976 |
| Case Name | Gregg v. Georgia |
| Case Number | 428 U.S. 153 |
| Decision | The death penalty is not per se unconstitutional |
| Reasoning | Capital punishment can serve the social purposes of retribution and deterrence |
| Precedent Overturned | Furman v. Georgia |
| Previous Decision | The death penalty violated the Eighth Amendment due to its arbitrary nature |
| Other Cases | Woodson v. North Carolina, Coker v. Georgia, Lockett v. Ohio, Enmund v. Florida, Ford v. Wainwright, Batson v. Kentucky |
Explore related products
$12.6 $17.99
What You'll Learn
The death penalty is not per se unconstitutional
In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled in Furman v. Georgia that the imposition of the death penalty under current systems of capital punishment violated the Eighth Amendment. This was due to its arbitrary and unevenly imposed nature, which constituted cruel and unusual punishment. This decision resulted in a moratorium on the death penalty, with 35 states amending their death penalty laws to comply with Furman.
However, in 1976, the Supreme Court held in Gregg v. Georgia that the death penalty was not per se unconstitutional. The Court ruled that the punishment could be revived if state laws provided an objective process for deciding when to apply it and gave juries sufficient discretion to determine its appropriateness. The Court upheld Georgia's new capital sentencing procedures, reasoning that the rules reduced the problem of arbitrary application seen in earlier statutes.
The Supreme Court has further refined the requirement of "a finding of aggravating factors" in death penalty cases. For instance, in Brown v. Sanders (2006), the Court ruled that for an appellate court to invalidate a sentencing factor, the sentence imposed must become unconstitutional unless another aggravating factor is found. In Kansas v. Marsh (2006), the Court clarified the principle of individualized sentencing jurisprudence, stating that states may impose the death penalty when aggravating and mitigating factors are equally weighted.
The Supreme Court has also addressed the role of jurors and their discretion in capital cases. In Crampton v. Ohio and McGautha v. California (1971), the defendants argued that unrestricted jury discretion in deciding between life and death sentences violated their Fourteenth Amendment right to due process. The Court rejected these claims, approving of unfettered jury discretion and a single proceeding to determine guilt and sentence.
While the death penalty has been ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court, there have been several cases that narrowed its application. For example, in Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), the Court struck down a Louisiana statute that allowed the death penalty for the rape of a child where the victim did not die. In Roper v. Simmons (2005), the Court held that the Constitution prohibits the execution of individuals who were under 18 at the time of their offense. Additionally, in Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the Court decided that executing intellectually or developmentally disabled criminals violates the ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
Missouri's 1875 Constitution: What Changed?
You may want to see also
Lethal injection is not cruel and unusual punishment
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a state-sanctioned punishment for crimes considered capital offences. The Eighth Amendment prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment", but the interpretation of what constitutes "cruel and unusual punishment" has evolved. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not inherently violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Eighth Amendment does shape certain procedural aspects regarding when a jury may use the death penalty and how it must be carried out.
In the late 1960s, the Supreme Court began "fine-tuning" the way the death penalty was administered. The Court heard two cases in 1968 dealing with the discretion given to the prosecutor and the jury in capital cases. The first case was U.S. v. Jackson, where the Supreme Court held that requiring the death penalty to be imposed only upon the recommendation of a jury was unconstitutional because it encouraged defendants to waive their right to a jury trial. The other case was Witherspoon v. Illinois, where the Supreme Court held that a potential juror's reservations about the death penalty were insufficient grounds to prevent them from serving on the jury in a death penalty case.
In 1971, the Supreme Court again addressed the problems associated with the role of jurors and their discretion in capital cases in Crampton v. Ohio and McGautha v. California. The defendants argued that unrestricted jury discretion in deciding whether the defendants lived or died resulted in arbitrary and capricious sentencing. The Court, however, rejected these claims, thereby approving of unrestricted jury discretion.
In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Court invalidated existing death penalty laws because they constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Court reasoned that the laws resulted in a disproportionate application of the death penalty, specifically discriminating against impoverished and minority communities. However, in Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Court refused to expand Furman, holding that the death penalty was not per se unconstitutional as it could serve the social purposes of retribution and deterrence.
In Baze v. Rees (2008), the Supreme Court held that lethal injection does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. The Court applied an objectively intolerable test to determine if the method of execution violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The legality of lethal injection was further upheld in Glossip v. Gross (2015), where the use of midazolam in Oklahoma's lethal injection protocol was examined. In Kennedy v. Louisiana, the Supreme Court limited the application of the death penalty to crimes involving murder or treason, requiring states to amend their laws if they allowed the death penalty for non-homicidal crimes.
In conclusion, while the death penalty has been a major point of contention, the Supreme Court has ruled that it does not inherently violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Lethal injection, as a method of execution, has also been upheld by the Court as constitutional. However, the Eighth Amendment continues to shape the procedural aspects of when and how the death penalty is carried out.
Sales Practice Complaints: Securities Industry Red Flags
You may want to see also
Executing intellectually disabled criminals is cruel and unusual
The death penalty, also known as capital punishment, is a sentence that can be prescribed by Congress or any state legislature for crimes considered capital offences. The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not violate the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Eighth Amendment does shape certain procedural aspects regarding when a jury may use the death penalty and how it must be carried out.
In Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002), the Supreme Court ruled that executing intellectually disabled criminals violates the ban on "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment. The Court found that the cognitive disability of intellectually disabled criminals lessens the severity of their crimes, and therefore the death penalty is a disproportionately severe punishment. The Court's ruling was based on the idea that intellectually disabled criminals have impairments in reasoning, judgement, and control of their impulses, which means they do not act with the same level of moral culpability as other criminals. This ruling was further supported by the idea that executing intellectually disabled people does not serve the recognised penological goals of retribution and deterrence, and is therefore a "purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering".
The Atkins decision has had a significant impact on the application of the death penalty to persons with diminished capacity. The Court noted that even mild levels of intellectual disability are still intellectual disabilities, and states may not execute anyone in this category. This decision has forced courts to consider whether other psychiatric disabilities also qualify for a culpability-based exemption from the death penalty.
In addition to Atkins v. Virginia, there have been other Supreme Court cases that have addressed the issue of executing intellectually disabled criminals. For example, in Tennard v. Dretke, 542 U.S. 274 (2004), the Court held that evidence of low intelligence should be admissible for mitigating purposes without being screened based on the severity of the disability. In Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399 (1986), the Court held that the Eighth Amendment prohibits the state from carrying out the death penalty on individuals with severe mental illness, and that issues of mental health at the time of execution must be determined in a proceeding that satisfies due process requirements.
While the Supreme Court has ruled that executing intellectually disabled criminals is unconstitutional, there have been subsequent cases that have refined the definition of intellectual disability and the process for determining intellectual disability in death penalty cases. For example, in Hall v. Florida (2014), the Supreme Court narrowed the discretion of states to designate an individual as intellectually incapacitated, holding that a state could not require an IQ score of 70 or below to make an Atkins claim. In Moore v. Texas (2017), the Supreme Court found that the lay perceptions advanced by the Briseno factors, which were implemented by the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals after Atkins, were "wholly non-clinical".
Sales Tax: What Services Are Taxable?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The death penalty for rape of a child is unconstitutional
The Supreme Court has addressed the constitutionality of the death penalty in a number of cases over the years. In the 1960s, the Court began to "fine-tune" the way the death penalty was administered, hearing cases such as U.S. v. Jackson (1968) and Witherspoon v. Illinois (1968) which dealt with the discretion given to prosecutors and juries in capital cases. In the 1970s, the Court continued to address issues related to the role of jurors and their discretion in capital cases, such as in Crampton v. Ohio and McGautha v. California (1971).
One of the most significant cases related to the death penalty and the Eighth Amendment is Furman v. Georgia (1972). In this case, the Court invalidated existing death penalty laws because they constituted cruel and unusual punishment. The Court set the standard that a punishment would be "cruel and unusual" if it was too severe for the crime, if it was arbitrary, if it offended society's sense of justice, or if it was not more effective than a less severe penalty.
In Coker v. Georgia, the Court held that the death penalty was not per se unconstitutional as it could serve the social purposes of retribution and deterrence. However, in Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), the Court specifically addressed the death penalty for rape of a child. The petitioner, Patrick Kennedy, was charged and convicted under a Louisiana state statute authorizing capital punishment for the rape of a child under 12 years of age. The Court held that the Eighth Amendment barred the respondent from imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child where the crime did not result, and was not intended to result, in the death of the victim.
The Court's ruling in Kennedy v. Louisiana was based on several key considerations. Firstly, the Court found that there was no national consensus in favor of capital punishment for child rape, as only six states retained the death penalty for this crime. Secondly, the Court drew a sharp line separating crimes intended to result and resulting in death from all other crimes, except treason and other crimes against the state. Thirdly, the Court found that any form of rape, including child rape, could not be compared with murder in severity. Finally, the Court considered the evolving standards of decency and concluded that the death penalty for child rape did not conform to societal dignity and respect for criminals.
In conclusion, the death penalty for rape of a child is unconstitutional according to the Supreme Court's ruling in Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008). This ruling was based on the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, the lack of national consensus, the severity of the crime, and evolving standards of decency. The Court found that the death penalty for rape of a child was disproportionate and did not serve a social purpose.
Leadership in the Skies: Effective Flight Deck Strategies
You may want to see also
Capital punishment is in decline
Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, has been a long-standing punishment that has been very popular for decades. However, in recent times, there has been a steady decline in its use and public support. In 2012, the number of executions and states permitting capital punishment both declined. This trend has continued, with only 13 executions carried out in 7 states so far in 2024. This decline can be attributed to a combination of factors, including:
The "Defense Lawyering Effect"
The creation of offices for defense lawyers in some states has resulted in a more pronounced decline in death sentences. In contrast, states that continue to leave the appointment of lawyers to local judges or counties have higher death sentence rates. The improvement in defense lawyering can be attributed to Supreme Court rulings, cultural shifts, or other factors.
Exonerations and Innocence Concerns
The increasing number of exonerations, including those revealed by DNA evidence, has raised concerns about the possibility of executing innocent people. This has likely contributed to declining public support for the death penalty.
Racial Bias
Analysis of data over the past 25 years has revealed a strong county-level pattern of racial bias, with counties having more black residents and those with more white victims of murder imposing more death sentences. This racial disparity has likely contributed to the overall decline in support for capital punishment.
Declining Crime Rates and Alternative Sentencing Options
The drop in crime rates, including murder rates, has resulted in fewer crimes eligible for capital punishment. Additionally, states have passed laws making life without parole a sentencing option for certain aggravated murders, providing a harsh alternative to the death penalty.
Cost Considerations
The increasing cost of death penalty cases has become a concern for prosecutors and contributed to the decline in seeking capital punishment.
Political and Electoral Shifts
In some cases, voters have elected officials who are skeptics of the death penalty, reflecting a shift in public opinion and political will.
While the death penalty remains on the books in many states, the decline in its use and public support indicates a changing landscape. The Supreme Court has played a role in refining and shaping capital punishment jurisprudence, and its rulings continue to impact the application and constitutionality of the death penalty in the United States.
Exploring the NC Constitution's Education Section
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
Gregg v. Georgia (1976).
In 1972, the Supreme Court ruled that the imposition of the death penalty under current systems of capital punishment violated the Eighth Amendment. This decision in Furman v. Georgia resulted in a moratorium on the death penalty. Georgia, Florida, Texas, North Carolina, and Louisiana were five of the 35 states that amended their death penalty laws to comply with Furman.
The Supreme Court held that the death penalty was not per se unconstitutional as it could serve the social purposes of retribution and deterrence. The Court upheld Georgia’s new capital sentencing procedures, reasoning that the Georgia rules reduced the problem of arbitrary application as seen in earlier statutes.
Some other key cases include:
- Baze v. Rees (2008) - The Supreme Court ruled that Kentucky's three-drug protocol for carrying out lethal injections does not amount to cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.
- Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008) - The Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a Louisiana statute that allowed the death penalty for the rape of a child where the victim did not die.
- Roper v. Simmons (2005) - The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution prohibits the execution of individuals who were under 18 at the time of the offense.
- Woodson v. North Carolina (1976) - The Supreme Court ruled that mandatory death sentences violate the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
There has been a long-term decline in the use of the death penalty, mirroring a decline in the homicide rate and public concerns about mass incarceration and racial inequities in the criminal justice system. In 2007, 38 states retained the death penalty, while today there are only 27. In 2021, Virginia became the first Southern state to abolish capital punishment.
