More handpicked essays just for you.
Eighth amendment and capital punishment
Eighth amendment and capital punishment
Does 8th amendment require punishment be shown to be both cruel and unusual
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Precedent in Defining Cruel and Unusual Punishment In the courts first understandings of the phrase "cruel and unusual punishments" as applied to the death penalty, the Court expressed more concerned with the method of imposing the punishment rather than the type of punishment itself or the penalty's excessive nature correlated with the offense. In Wilkerson v. Utah , there was a legislative act passed on March 6, 1862, which provides a convicted person of a capital offense "shall suffer death by being shot, hanged, or beheaded," as the court may direct, or "he shall have his option as to the manner of his execution." The prisoner was charged with malicious, premeditated murder and was sentenced to be publicly shot. The court held that the sentence was not fallacious by a unanimous decision. Here …show more content…
Expansion on the Definition of Cruel and Unusual Punishment Weems v. United States expanded the courts boundaries on cruel and unusual punishments. The idea of the Eighth Amendment is not only imposed on those punishments of which inflict physical pain, but also those of which outweigh the crime committed. Weems was an officer of Coast Guard and transportation of the United States Government of the Philippine Islands. Weems was convicted of falsifying records of the U.S. Coastguard which ultimately resulted in government defraud. He was then sentenced to fifteen years in prison with hard labor; there was a requirement to be chained at all times, lost all political rights, and a hefty fine. Plus, upon Weems release, he was subject to surveillance permanently. “In interpreting the Eighth Amendment, it will be regarded as a precept of justice that punishment for crime should be graduated and proportioned to the offense.” The court concluded that the punishment given to Weems did indeed reach the standards of “cruel and unusual.” This was the first time the court
In the United States, a citizen has rights granted to them under documents such as the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, which gives citizens certain freedoms as long as they obey the law. When someone commits a crime, they are then entitled to aspects such as a speedy trial, a fair jury, an attorney if they wish, and other things, under the sixth amendment. Even if the person is found guilty, as a U.S. citizen they have rights under the eighth amendment which include protection against excessive bail or fines, and cruel and unusual punishment. Since the framers enacted the amendment, the exact definition of cruel and unusual punishment has been difficult to pin down, changing with the times and everyone’s interpretations. Pete Earley’s novel, The Hot House: Life Inside Leavenworth Prison, depicts the conditions in the United States’ toughest prison, where some prisoner recounts, as well as Earley’s
Weems v. United States (1910) set a judicial precedent for showing that punishment must be proportionate to the crime committed and allowed courts to decide what is “cruel and unusual”. Lower courts allowed the VIS and that use sometimes came under question. Thus the case was sent to the U.S. Supreme Court to review. In Booth v. Maryland (1987) and Gathers v. South Carolina (1989) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that VIS could potentially lead to harsher sentences and yet upon further review reconsider their stance on VIS and overturn their decisions and concluded that the Eight Amendment was not violated by victim Impact statements on the ground that such statements did not lead to cruel and unusual punish...
In 1972, the Furman v. Georgia case temporarily caused capital punishment in the United States to cease until distinct guidelines about the crimes that required the death penalty were written. Until states revised their laws, capital punishment was ruled cruel and unusual punishment. Before Furman, there were no clearly defined laws about what constituted capital punishment, so the process to sentence a capital criminal was much faster and easier. By adding an appeal system, most states permitted capital punishment once again, but the prisoner’s time spent on death row drastically increased. Adding an appeal system did not make killing a human being any less cruel and unusual; in fact, ordering a person to live in fear, uncertainty, and agony for an even longer period of time is crueler than quickly ending the
... So instead of the Eighth Amendment being “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment inflicted.” (Legal Dictionary), it should be “Excessive bail or fines should not be imposed unless it fits the crime committed, cruel and unusual punishment should also not be imposed unless the need was to arise where the crime was extreme enough for all the jury members to agree on a cruel or unusual punishment.”. Works Cited Legal Dictionary. Farlax.
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....
"Capital punishment is a term which indicates muddled thinking." George Bernard Shaw The "muddled thinking" that Shaw speaks of is the thinking that perpetuates the controversy over capital punishment in the United States today. The impractical concurrence of a theoretical, moral argument and definite, legal application has left all sides in this controversy dissatisfied with the ultimate handling of the issue. There are legitimate ethical and empirical considerations that stand on both the side that favors and on the side that opposes the death penalty. The general incompatibility of these considerations renders them irreconcilable. It is within this condition of irreconcilability that the government must initiate and implement its policies regarding capital punishment. This fixed condition has led to the necessity for and creation of comprises between both sites of this debate, attempting to synthesize the considerations of the two. The contentious issue of the capital punishment was rekindled in the 1970s when, in 1976, the Supreme reinstated the practice after a four-year hiatus. The arguments that comprise much of the legal debate on the issue stem from the eighth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution. The eighth reads, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." 1
The “cruel and unusual” clause in the eighth amendment states that “cruel and unusual punishment” such as torture or lingering death can not be inflicted on anyone as a form of execution. It is however permissible under the 8th Amendment to execute a convict by means of hanging, shooting, electrocution, and lethal gas.
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...
Should the clause be confined to the seventeenth century ideology it originated from or should it be understood according to the people’s popular opinion? The two main arguments that form the debate of the constitutionality of punishments circulate around whether the clause should be interpreted according to when it was written or the current state of affairs. However, John F. Stinneford, a professor at the University of Florida Levin College of Law, explains that the appropriate way to determine whether a punishment violates the cruel and unusual clause of the eighth amendment follows neither of these arguments. Rather, he analyzes the holistic clause and pays close attention to the usage of the word “unusual” often overlooked by those debating its meaning. Stinneford explains his argument as follows: “If a given punishment has been continuously used for a very long time, this is powerful evidence that multiple generations of Americans have considered it reasonable and just… If a once-traditional punishment falls out of usage for several generations, it becomes unusual. If a legislature then tries to reintroduce it, courts should compare how harsh it is relative to those punishment practices that are still part of our tradition.” (Stinneford, 2016). This interpretation is validated by countless examples in United States history, such as how it has become unconstitutional to sentence the death penalty
The Eighth amendment which was passed by Congress on September 25, 1789 and was ratified on December 15, 1791 states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” This helps protect citizens by not allowing the judge to assign the defendant an excessive bail without knowing whether he or she is guilty of the crime in question. The second part states that there shall be no cruel or unusual punishment although it has not really been determined what is cruel and what is not. Things like branding, strangulation, being locked in stocks or burned where still means of punishment when the Eighth amendment was
Is the death penalty consistent with the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against the imposition of cruel and unusual punishments? This essay will address this question and present a short history of the death penalty in America.
Main Point 1: Imagine someone that has been accused of murder and sentenced to death row has to spend almost 17-20 years in jail and then one day get kill. Then later on the person that they killed was not the right person.
Solitary confinement is a penal tactic used on inmates who pose a threat to themselves or other inmates. Solitary confinement is type of segregated prison in which prisoners are held in their cell for 22-24 hours every day. If they are allowed to leave their cell, they will silently walk shackled and in between two guards. They can only leave for showers or exercise. Their exercise and shower are always done alone and inside. They can exercise in fenced in yards surrounded by concrete. Solitary confinement is either used as a punishment for prison behaviors, a protection method for targeted inmates, or a place to keep prisoners who are a threat to the general prison population. Many prisoners are put in Administrative Segregation for their protection. Many prisoners in this type of segregation are teenagers, homosexuals, and mentally ill prisoners. Many mentally ill prisoners are sent to solitary confinement because there are not rehabilitation services available, and prison officials have run out of options (Shalev, 2008, p [1-2]). Solitary confinement is a convenient method for prison systems, but the detrimental effects on inmates make it an unsuitable option for inmate control.
Affirming that the eighth amendment, which prohibits “cruel and unusual punishments”, had never excluded or limited the death penalty when it was first adopted. This fact is important to Scalia; as he believes the Constitution is an “enduring document”—a document in which the original principles and intentions need to be permanently
The death penalty is the lawful killing of a human being after a trial by