Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
essay over the death penalty and the 8th amendment
capital punishment history
capital punishment history
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: essay over the death penalty and the 8th amendment
Sometimes in life people are not given their rights, the rights that are supposed to be given fairly to them under all circumstances. Although the rights of the people are extremely important in some cases, people tend to change them. The Ford v. Wainwright case is a great example of this it shows even the government can sometimes break rules just to get their point across. This case shows many different ways of how things can be broken down into something it is not, this case shows the importance of how things really get handled behind closed doors of the government. “Ford’s” case was not properly handled because the court system decided to go against the eighth amendment, which made this case unfair. In the case Ford v. Wainwright the court chose to side with Wainwright. Wainwright won this case since the courts felt the need to go against the eighth amendment since the amendment was not set in stone according to them. Yes, Ford was insane he shot the cop and must have not been held up to it or at the most being executed according to the eighth amendment. Was executing Ford a slightly over the top existence that he was insane? Although ford died while awaiting his execution he was still going to be executed, he still lost the case. Although Ford was convicted from killing a cop the detail that he was insane still doesn’t change so should the amendment? Ford v. Wainwright is historically important for the reason that it shows the concept the insane can really be executed, also that although there are rules and regulations they can be broken by people without any sort of power or people with more power than others. Although things are set for everyone to follow some people break those to break other people down. The amendments ar... ... middle of paper ... ...ot follow the rules because they had the power to do so. Works Cited "Ford v. Wainwright - 477 U.S. 399 (1986)." Justia US Supreme Court Center. JUSTIA US Supreme Court, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014 "Ford v. Wainwright | Capital Punishment in Context." Ford v. Wainwright | Capital Punishment in Context. Capital Punishment in Contex, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014 "FindLaw | Cases and Codes." FindLaw | Cases and Codes. FINDLAW, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014 "FORD v. WAINWRIGHT." Ford v. Wainwright. Chicago-kent College of Law, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. "Ford v. Wainwright." Http://www.apa.org. American Psycological Association, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014 "Ford v. Wainwright." LII / Legal Information Institute. Legal Information Institute, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014. "The Invigorated Mind." : The Execution of the Insane: Ford v. Wainwright (1986). The Invigorated Mind, n.d. Web. 19 Feb. 2014.
To this day, Americans have many rights and privileges. Rights stated in the United States constitution may be simple and to the point, but the rights Americans have may cause debate to whether or not something that happens in society, is completely reasonable. The Texas v. Johnson case created much debate due to a burning of the American Flag. One may say the burning of the flag was tolerable because of the rights citizens of the United States have, another may say it was not acceptable due to what the American flag symbolizes for America. (Brennan and Stevens 1). Johnson was outside of his First Amendment rights, and the burning of the American flag was unjust due to what the flag means to America.
Wallace v. Jaffree. United States Supreme Court. 4 June 1985. Find Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 May 2014.
The court case of Plessy vs. Ferguson created nationwide controversy in the United States due to the fact that its outcome would ultimately affect every citizen of our country. On Tuesday, June 7th, 1892, Mr. Homer Plessy purchased a first class ticket on the East Louisiana Railroad for a trip from New Orleans to Covington. He then entered a passenger car and took a vacant seat in a coach where white passengers were also sitting. There was another coach assigned to people who weren’t of the white race, but this railroad was a common carrier and was not authorized to discriminate passengers based off of their race. (“Plessy vs. Ferguson, syllabus”).Mr. Plessy was a “Creole of Color”, a person who traces their heritage back to some of the Caribbean, French, and Spanish who settled into Louisiana before it was part of the US (“The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow”). Even though Plessy was only one eighth African American, and could pass for a full white man, still he was threatened to be penalized and ejected from the train if he did not vacate to the non-white coach (“Plessy vs. Ferguson, syllabus). In ...
Interpretation of the Eighth Amendment-Rummel, Solem and The Venerable Case of Weems v. United States. Duke Law Journal, Vol. 1984:789. Retrieved from http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2886&context=dlj&sei-redir=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fscholar.google.com%2Fscholar_url%3Fhl%3Den%26q%3Dhttp%3A%2F%2Fscholarship.law.duke.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%253Farticle%253D2886%2526context%253Ddlj%26sa%3DX%26scisig%3DAAGBfm0U6qTJJcBT1EoWmQVHDXIojJgBHw%26oi%3Dscholarr#search=%22http%3A%2F%2Fscholarship.law.duke.edu%2Fcgi%2Fviewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D2886%26context%3Ddlj%22
...Streeter 275. Courtesy of the Tarlton Law Library, Jamail Center for Legal Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 2013. Web. 3 February 2014.
"Landmark Cases of the U.S. Supreme Court." Background Summary & Questions (•••). N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.
"Stop and Frisk." Gale Encyclopedia of American Law. Ed. Donna Batten. 3rd ed. Vol. 9. Detroit: Gale, 2010. 391-392. Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 5 Nov. 2013.
LAWRENCE V. TEXAS. 478 U. S. 186 :: Volume 478 :: 1986 :: Full Text." US Supreme Court Cases from Justia & Oyez. .
The courts have declared that if a sentence is inhuman, outrageous, or shocking to society, it would be considered cruel and unusual. For example, cutting body parts off, breaking on the wheel, crucifixion, and so on. The Founding Fathers intention for the Eighth Amendment was to give the government into the hands of people and take it away from arbitrary rulers and judges, who might expose any amount of excessive bail or cruel and unusual punishment that they wished....
The final clause of the first section of the fourteenth amendment explains, "nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." 2 The 1976 ruling of Gregg v....
Wagner, F. D. (2010). McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al.. Supreme Court of the United States, 1, 1-214. Retrieved May 4, 2014, from http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf
In the early 1950’s, the number of executions sharply declined. Opponents of the death penalty claimed that it violated the Eighth Amendment, which forbids cruel and unusual punishment. Opponents also claimed the death penalty violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which states that all citizens are entitled to equal protection under the law. In early 1972, William Furman was convicted of burglary and murder. While Furman was burglarizing a home, a resident arrived at the scene. Startled, Furman tried to flee, but tripped and fell in the process. The gun Furman was carrying discharged, killing the resident in the process. Furman did not believe he deserved the death penalty. The constitutionality of capital punishment in this circumstance was considered in the supreme co...
As the case in Illinois clearly demonstrates, concerns about the fundamental discrepancy between a government's authority and what that government's authority guarantees are still being resolved. Cases like Tinker still have meaning and relevance to the situations of today, but at the same time, the lesson of Slotterback and innumerable other cases is that precedent can be defied, that every new generation requires a new interpretation of the provisions and guarantees made in grand terms vague enough to allow just such reinterpretation. History shows that censorship can be unfolded into either prior restraint or public forum, the approach from liberty or the approach from authority. Judicial sympathies have swung from one to the other with some regularity. With an issue as contentious as this, we can safely expect they will continue to do so.
Sheppard v. Maxwell - 1966. (n.d.). Justia US Supreme Court Center. Retrieved April 7, 2014, from http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/384/333/
...Gale Encyclopedia of Everyday Law. Ed. Shirelle Phelps. Vol. 1. Detroit: Gale, 2003. 265-271. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Gale. Tarrant County College. 2 Mar. 2011 .