Table of Contents
Introduction
The death penalty remains a contentious issue in the United States. While some individuals believe it is an essential part of the criminal justice system, others argue that it violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Over the years, the Supreme Court has been at the forefront of determining the constitutionality of capital punishment. This article examines the Supreme Court’s capital punishment decisions and how they relate to the topic.
Background
Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a legal process where a person is sentenced to death by the state as a punishment for a crime. Capital punishment is a long-standing practice worldwide, and its acceptance varies from country to country. For instance, while capital punishment is legal in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, China, and Japan, other nations such as Canada, Australia, and most of Europe have abolished it. The United States remains one of the few countries where capital punishment is legal, but its use remains limited and mostly concentrated in conservative states.
The Supreme Court’s Role in Capital Punishment
As the highest court in the land, the Supreme Court plays a crucial role in determining the constitutionality of capital punishment. Over the years, the Supreme Court has issued several landmark decisions that have shaped capital punishment in the United States. These decisions have covered aspects such as the method of execution, who can be sentenced to death, the appeal process, and the role of racial bias in capital punishment. Some of the most significant capital punishment decisions made by the Supreme Court include:
Furman v. Georgia (1972)
Furman v. Georgia was a landmark case that temporarily halted capital punishment in the United States. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty, as it was being applied in the United States, was unconstitutional. The Court held that the death penalty violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, as it was disproportionately applied to minorities and the poor. The decision did not abolish the death penalty but instead declared that it was unconstitutional as it was being used at the time.
Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
Gregg v. Georgia was the case that overturned the Furman v. Georgia decision and reinstated capital punishment in the United States. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that Georgia’s revised death penalty statute was constitutional. The Court held that the new statute provided a way for courts to ensure that the death penalty was applied fairly and was not arbitrary. The decision paved the way for other states to revise their death penalty statutes and reinstate capital punishment.
Atkins v. Virginia (2002)
Atkins v. Virginia was a landmark case that addressed the issue of executing individuals with intellectual disabilities. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to execute individuals with intellectual disabilities, as it violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The decision was based on the premise that individuals with intellectual disabilities have limited culpability for their actions and that executing them would serve no retributive or deterrent purpose.
Roper v. Simmons (2005)
Roper v. Simmons was a case that addressed the issue of executing juveniles. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to execute individuals who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes. The Court held that juveniles were less culpable than adults and that executing them violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The decision was based on the premise that juveniles have a greater capacity for rehabilitation and that the death penalty was not an effective deterrent for crimes.
Baze v. Rees (2008)
Baze v. Rees was a case that addressed the issue of the death penalty’s method of execution. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the three-drug protocol used for lethal injection did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. The Court held that lethal injection was the most humane method of execution available, and that the three-drug protocol used by most states did not pose a significant risk of unnecessary pain.
Glossip v. Gross (2015)
Glossip v. Gross was a case that revisited the issue of lethal injection and the three-drug protocol used for execution. In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the three-drug protocol, despite claims that it caused unnecessary pain. The Court held that the inmates challenging the three-drug protocol failed to identify a practical alternative that would be less painful, and that they did not provide sufficient evidence that the existing protocol caused unnecessary pain.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s role in capital punishment is critical in shaping the laws governing its application. The Court has issued several landmark decisions that have addressed various aspects of capital punishment, including the method of execution, the appeal process, and the role of racial bias. While capital punishment remains a contentious issue, the Supreme Court’s decisions have provided guidance on how the death penalty should be applied in the United States. Ultimately, the debate on capital punishment will continue, and it is up to the Supreme Court to strike the right balance between justice, fairness, and humanity.
Capital Punishment, otherwise known as the death penalty, is the practice of putting a convicted criminal to death as a result of crimes committed. The death penalty has been an issue that has undergone rabid deliberation, both on the parts of its proponents, as well as its opposition. On one hand, arguments in protest of both the legal, as well as the ethical, implications of the death penalty have been known to include a range of sources, including Biblical passages – ‘Thou shalt not kill’ – to legislative documentation, such as references to the 8th Amendment, which prohibits the practice of ‘cruel and unusual punishment’.
On the other hand, arguments in support of capital punishment have cited sources akin to those of their opponents, including Biblical passages – ‘An eye for an eye’ – in addition to the 8th Amendment, which states ‘Let the punishment fit the crime’. Yet, the establishment of a process regarding the death penalty reveals its inherent complexity as both sides of the argument are forced to consider the unavoidable ideology of one human being relinquishing the right to life from another. The earliest reference to capital punishment in American history was in 1764, when the Pennsylvania State Legislature ruled that capital punishment was only permissible in the case of murder in the first degree. In 1846, the State of Michigan forbade the use of capital punishment within its State Legislature.
Internationally, Venezuela was the first sovereign country to completely eradicate the death penalty within their borders, doing so in 1863. However, such decisive legislative action in regards to the ruling of capital punishment is still very rare, both in the United States and abroad. Since the penning of the phrase, ‘Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness’ in Article 13 of the Constitution, the debate over the legality of the death penalty has existed. The aforementioned statement presents a circumstantial dilemma riddled with ambiguity.
Legislators are forced to consider whether or not one who deprives another of the freedoms listed in Article 13 is entitled to those same freedoms. Due to the inalienable rights allowed to all citizens of the United States in the text of the Constitution, there exists a heavy reliance on both interpretation, as well as prioritization in the process of establishing a clear-cut, legal stance on capital punishment. On account that Article 13 of the Constitution is not considered to be any more important than the 8th Amendment, value assigned to each of the respective texts would be resigned to the subjectivity of interpretation.
Yet, the enforcement of the death penalty is an implicit offense to the autonomous agency guaranteed to every citizen. In 2004, the Kansas Audit Report stated that the cost of an average execution, as a result of a conviction deemed worthy of capital punishment, is approximately 1.26 million dollars. This figure included court costs, salaries, and the maintenance and operation of the execution apparatus. Yet, the report also listed the cost of life imprisonment of a felon convicted of the same crime as $740,000.
