Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
A short summary on the 8th amendment
The eighth amendment simbel
8 amendment constitution
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: A short summary on the 8th amendment
Execution of the Mentally Retarded
Stories regarding terrorism and war plaster every news broadcast, newspaper, and television show in the country; however, there has recently been a story that has become just as important, and is being focused upon by almost every state in our nation. The story regards the issue of execution and if it is wrong to execute those who are considered mentally retarded, due to the Constitution’s Eighth Amendment. The amendment states that “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (“Eighth Amendment”). Due to this amendment, I believe it is not only constitutionally wrong, but also morally wrong as well to execute those who are mentally retarded.
According to an article written by Linda Greenhouse of The New York Times, entitled, “Top Court Hears Argument of Execution of Retarded”, Daryl Atkins was convicted for the 1996 shooting death of Eric Nesbitt, an airman at Langley Air Force Base who was kidnapped from a Virginia 7-11 store by Akins and another man, William Jones. This case has brought about one of the most perplexing and intriguing questions to the U.S. Supreme court regarding criminal punishment; should Daryl Atkins, who was convicted of murder and who has been sentenced to death, be executed even though he is mentally retarded? I believe that he should not be executed, due to the fact that it would be considered cruel and unusual punishment killing someone who is mentally retarded, which is against the Eighth Amendment to our Constitution.
Atkins has an IQ of 59, which is equivalent to that of a 10-year-old child (Curriden). He made C’s and D’s in middle school and flunked out of high school. He has neve...
... middle of paper ...
...2002. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment08/.
Greenburg, Jan Crawford. “Justices Give Little Clue to Leaning on Death Penalty for Mentally Retarded.” Chicago Tribune 20 February 2002 pK0362. 2 March 2002.
Greenhouse, Linda. Top Court Argument on Execution of Retarded.
21 February 2002. The New York Times. 26 February 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/21/national/21SCOT.html.
Myers, Jennifer. “Death Penalty for Mentally Retarded May Slide off High Court’s Docket Again.” Daily Business Review v76 i160. 28 January 2002 pA12.
2 March 2002.
Stout, David. Execution of Retarded to Be Reviewed by Supreme Court.
20 February 2002. The New York Times. 26 February 2002
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/02/20/national/20CND-SCOTUS.html.
“U.S. Supreme Court.” FindLaw.com. 10 March 2002.
http://laws.findlaw.com/us/217/349.html.
One can either be innocent or guilty. Likewise, one can choose to either condemn or empathize with the accused. These binaries prove amply important throughout Sherman Alexie's 1996 poem entitled "Capital Punishment," in which a prison cook recounts the day of an inmate's execution. Throughout the poem, the speaker parenthetically inserts on five separate occasions the phrase "I am not a witness," but near the conclusion of the poem, he contradicts his previous denials, proclaiming, "I am a witness." Readers of the poem may at first be puzzled by the speaker's repeated denial that he is a witness followed by his eventual declaration that he is, in fact, a witness; however, further examination reveals that the speaker, by progressing from condemnation
The death penalty is a cruel and unusual punishment which is strictly prohibited by the 8th amendment. William J. Brennan, Jr., JD, the Former US Supreme Court Justice, stated "Death is not only an unusually severe punishment, unusual in its pain, in its finality, and in its enormity, but it serves no penal purpose more effectively than a less severe punishment; therefore the principle inherent in the Clause that prohibits pointless infliction of excessive punishment when less severe punishment can adequately achieve the same purposes invalidates the punishment." Gregg v Georgia [1976]. After committing a crime all criminals will face some form of punishment after the action. As the honorable William J. Brennan stated above, if you can still bring justice to the crimes committed why would one go the extra mile to take somebody’s life. This makes the death penalty look spiteful and cruel. Even though criminals should be fully held for their actions and are not worthy of supporting in a jail cell, these arguments do serve a purpose. It is against America’s ethics as a country that follows the Constitution to continue these executions and makes the US look hypocritical and inhumane when trying to be the role model for the
...n some peoples’ opinions’ that would be a horrible idea, but I think that if someone was to make people suffer and put them through absolute misery, they should not be let off the hook very easily. 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 “as “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 should agree on a cruel or unusual punishment.”.
Marquis, Joshua. “Should the Death Penalty Be Abolished?” The New York Times Upfront, 07, Oct. 2013 :22
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.
Many call capital punishment unconstitutional and point to the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution for support. The amendment states that, "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines be imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishment be inflicted." Those who oppose the death penalty target the 'cruel and unusual' phrase as an explanation of why it is unconstitutional. Since the Framers of the Constitution are no longer with us and we base our nation on the words in which that document contains, the legality of the death penalty is subject to interpretation. Since there is some ambiguity or lack of preciseness in the Constitution, heated debate surrounding this issue has risen in the last ten years.
"Botched Executions In The USA." Canadian Coalition Against the Death Penalty. 20 May 2009 .
...ed United States. U.S. Government Accounting Office. Capital Punishment. Washington: GPO, 1994 Cheatwood, Derral and Keith Harries. The Geography of Execution: The Capital Punishment Quagmire in America. Rowman, 1996 NAACP Legal Defense Fund . Death Row. New York: Hein, 1996 "Ex-Death Row Inmate Cleared of Charges." USA Today 11 Mar. 1999: 2A "Fatal Flaws: Innocence and the Death Penalty." Amnesty International. 10 Oct. 1999 23 Oct. 1999 Gest, Ted. "House Without a Blue Print." US News and World Report 8 Jul. 1996: 41 Stevens, Michelle. "Unfairness in Life and Death." Chicago Sun-Times 7 Feb. 1999: 23A American Bar Association. The Task Ahead: Reconciling Justice with Politics. 1997 United States. Federal Bureau of Investigation. Uniform Crime Report. Washington: GPO, 1994 Wickham, DeWayne. "Call for a Death Penalty Moratorium." USA Today 8 Feb. 1999: 17A ILKMURPHY
Allen, Amanda. .The Death Penalty. 20 April 1999. Justice For All. 19 April 2001. www.prodeathpenalty.com.
The eighth amendment protects Americans from the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment. Many death penalty opponents use this as the backbone to their argument against capital punishment. Other than being cruel, I do not think that the death penalty can be used judiciously in the United States or any other part of the world. Personally, I do not think that human beings are perfect and as such they cannot set up a perfect justice system. In any justice system that is flawed and allows bias in certain cases, the death penalty should not be used as a means of punishment because of its irrevocable nature. When I came across Sarah Hawkins’ article regarding the case of Karla Faye Tucker, I was surprised to see the manifestation of my fears of the biases involved in the use of the death penalty in the case of this woman. Hawkins described how the representations of Tucker as a white, heterosexual Christian woman worked in her favor in the criminal justice system, and how media representations perpetuated the argument for her release from death row. Hawkins made very valid and convincing arguments that representations of “womanhood” that are expected in American culture can make a large difference in how we perceive criminals, and in certain cases these representations can be a matter of life or death.
" Mental Illness and the Death Penalty." American Civil Liberties Union. May 5, 2009. Web. 04
... rape or treason was committed ("8th Amendment to the Constitution – U.S. Amendment VIII Summary"). However, there are some cases where the death penalty is unacceptable regardless of the crime. In the Supreme Court case of Roper v Simmons the court decided that the execution of someone for a crime they committed when they were a minor violated the eighth amendment . The court case of Atkins v Virginia established that the death penalty is not an acceptable punishment for mentally ill felons (Lemieux, "The Supreme Court's Empty Eighth Amendment Promise"). The Supreme Court has also ruled that executing anyone under the age of 18 is an act of cruel and unusual punishment ("8th Amendment to the Constitution – U.S. Amendment VIII Summary"). The death penalty is the worst punishment a person could get, and because of that there are many restrictions on when to use it.
During those years, the Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment violated the Eight Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. However, this ended in 1976, when the Supreme Court reversed the ruling. They stated that the punishment of sentencing one to death does not perpetually infringe the Constitution. Richard Nixon said, “Contrary to the views of some social theorists, I am convinced that the death penalty can be an effective deterrent against specific crimes. ”1 Whether the case be morally, monetarily, or just pure disagreement, citizens have argued the benefits of capital punishment.
“The case Against the Death Penalty.” aclu.org. American Civil Liberties Union, 2012. Web. 12 Feb. 2013
Fein, Bruce. "Individual Rights and Responsibility - The Death Penalty, But Sparingly." Speech. American Bar Association. Feb. 2003. Web. 20 Nov. 2013.