Passed on September 25, 1789 and ratified on December 15, 1791 by Congress, the eighth amendment has been present in the United States for quite some time. Over time, the amendment has morphed and interpreted differently. In the Constitution it states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”. In the 1990s, individuals referenced the eighth amendment when discussing capital punishment or the death penalty. Death sentences were most frequent during the 1900s, resulting in some individuals declaring that it went against the amendment (Source A).
The Eighth Amendment prohibits inflicting cruel and unusual punishment on citizens. The judicial branch must ensure that the rights and privileges granted to American people by the Constitution are provided equally regardless of their race, sex, or sexual identification (Edmondson, 2017).
The Supreme Court ruled that it did not violate the eighth amendment and was constitutional. This brings up the question “Was the case properly determined by the Supreme Court or should it be Congress to decide?” Furman v. Georgia (1972) was a case similar to Gregg’s. A man was convicted of murder and burglary. He has sentenced the death penalty.
The 8th amendment clearly states that no one should be given a cruel and unjust punishment from the federal government. Because the killer could not think straight, this case is argued over whether or not the death penalty is too extreme for a man who can’t even control his
The Eighth Amendment was created to prohibit cruel punishments that the colonists would receive from the British. The British brought colonists over to an unfair trial and then received punishment that sometimes would be death. The writers of the wanted to make sure that the colonists received the fair trial and fair punishment they deserve. The Eight Amendment was ratified in December 5, 1791 as a part of the Bill of Rights. The Eighth Amendment has not been changed since the ratification in 1791.
In today’s day and age, a person does not get put to death for just any crime. A recurring argument against the death penalty is that sentencing a defendant to death violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition. The Eighth Amendment protects against cruel and unusual punishment. Mental illness is expressly recognized as a mitigating factor in most death penalty statutes. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion in the case of Ford vs. Wainwright that the use of cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to execute a person whose mental state renders understanding of capital punishment is impossible.
Although, the term “cruel and unusual punishment” is constantly changing as society develops. For example when the amendment was first made cruel and unusual punishment at the time was being burned at the stake or being tortured. Today cruel and unusual punishment can include the death penalty and it was not until a little after the 1970s when the death penalty was considered a part of cruel and unusual punishment. The main use of the eighth amendment in court is for cruel and unusual punishment. Some cases that use the eighth amendment are the Roper v. Simmons, Hudson v. McMillian, and the Woodson v. North
The death penalty has been significantly changing according to these six cases: Atkins v. Virginia (2002), Roper v. Simmons (2002), Kennedy v. Louisiana (2008), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama (2012). These six cases discuss the “evolving standards of decency”. The “evolving standards of decency” state that the implementation of the death penalty is deemed unconstitutional for certain circumstances, defendants, and crimes. When implementing this test, the courts analyze the most prevalent opinions among the different state legislatures, judges, sentencing juries, and the general public in order to determine whether the use of the death penalty is cruel and unusual.
The most important issue that must be addressed in this case is the principle of the “evolving standards of decency” and the uses of a national consensus. The “evolving standards of decency” were developed by Trop v. Dulles and have been implemented in one way or another in all of the precedents dealing with “cruel and unusual” punishment. It is important to treat these principles as an important aspect of “cruel and unusual” punishment jurisprudence, therefore turning from these set of principles would be foolish and a disregard for every precedent. However, it is important to acknowledge that each case satisfies the standards by using a different method; some use the presence or lack of state legislature as a judgment of consensus while others look at foreign countries.
It’s Not working out. By:Taija Jones. The 8th amendment says “Excessive bail shall not be required, Nor excessive fines imposed, Nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” . With that being said if the 8th amendment applies for cruel punishments of death penalties then why is it still happening.
This is because the 8th amendment states, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” Giving someone who has mental disease the death penalty would be seen as a cruel and unusual punishment. Some may argue that even though the killer did murder the man, he did not show any empathy for what he did. This can be proven otherwise because of the fact that someone under the influence of mental disease may not always be able to control their actions. In similar cases such as the Walton vs. Virginia, and Eley vs. Ohio, the same practice was used.
The 8th amendment states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted”. Justice Samuel and four other justices conclude that the lethal injection does not cause harm and does not violate the 8th amendment according to this article. “ Testimony from both sides supports the District Court’s conclusion that midazolam(medicine) can render a person insensate to pain” says Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. Justice
The Court relied on distinct “strands of precedent” to justify its Miller conclusion. According to the Court, the two classifications for proportionality challenges are the length of term-of-years, accounting for the attendant circumstances; and categorical restrictions when imposing the death penalty (Darden, 2014). There were five factors introduced with Miller’s case by the Supreme Court. The five characteristics or consequences of juveniles’ immaturity relevant for mitigation of
Do you think that the eighth amendment supports the death penalty? According to http://th8thamendment.weebly.com/current-controversies.html “punishment given to criminals is supposed to give some sort of rehabilitation. If the convict is killed, then there is no point to the penalty.” This makes sense because if you get 30 years in prison or a fine, once it is over you get the chance to learn from it and to never make the same mistake again. Also according to http://th8thamendment.weebly.com/current-controversies.html Sister Camille D’Arienz, a catholic nun who started the Declaration of Life movement said “Capital punishment is the only time we punish the person in kind for a crime.”
In today’s society of the United States Supreme Court has verified that vicious crimes committed by juveniles should always be punished with a life sentence in prison because of the violation of the Eighth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment is stated,” Prohibiting the federal government from imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishment.” Life in prison without parole will cause juveniles to fail there own trust, immaturity, and will stay in prison with no help. Is it the juveniles fault of ending up in prison? Is it there daily life style at home? How they were raised back at home? Or they were going through a rough childhood? Is it the parents fault or the child’s fault that they end up in a juvenile jail for 15 years just because of unnoticed attention?