The eighth amendment of the United States Constitution prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. New Cutting edge technology carries with it the likelihood of new treatment for criminals. A fictional example of such technology is Ludovico treatment, which alters the consciousness of a criminal and makes them non-violent. The use of the Ludovico treatment on prisoners can be considered a cruel and unusual punishment and thus violate the eighth amendment. Even though this treatment may be technically unconstitutional, it would be allowed in the United States for the betterment of society. In the United States there are many examples of drugs that are used to help people with psychological problems. An example of this is the drug Antabuse. Antabuse …show more content…
The Supreme Court has found many acts of punishment unconstitutional, such as torture, and inhumane executions. Ludovico treatment does not harm a person, instead what it does is reform that person so they can conform to societal behavioral standards. An example of a Supreme Court case that dealt with the Eighth Amendment was Hudson vs McMillan in 1992. In this case the Court considered whether the beating of inmates violated the inmate’s Eight Amendment rights. In a 7 to 2 vote the Supreme Court found that prison guards exerting excessive force maliciously to induce harm on inmates violated his eighth amendment rights even if there were no permanent injuries of hospitalization ( Taxin, 1052). In this case the Supreme Court ruled that beating prisoners was unconstitutional because it was viewed as cruel and sadistic. Ludovico treatment does not seek to harm criminals, instead it seeks to reform criminals so they won’t be a danger to society. For this reason the Supreme Court would not rule Ludovico unconstitutional. Another example of a Supreme Court case dealing with the eighth amendment was the Supreme Court case Roper v Simmons in 2005 ( DeNunzio, 369). In this case, the Court considered whether it was merciless and bizarre to execute a convicted felon for a criminal offense committed as a minor. The Supreme Court ruled against the execution in 5-4 decision. They rationalized that it was wrong to execute someone for a crime they committed when they were minor because the mind of a minor had not yet completely and fully developed. This is another case in which the Supreme Court found that the penalization of someone was inhumane and unjust. Ludovico treatment wouldn’t come under such scrutiny, as long as the treatment is prescribed as a treatment to people that are
The first of the Progressive amendments is the 16th Amendment. Approved by the Senate in 1909, it introduced the graduated income tax where a person’s taxes increase relative to his or her income. Specifically, the tax charged 1 percent of incomes over $20,000 and a maximum of 7 percent on incomes over $500,000 (Walter Nugent, p.86). It was brought about after the 2 percent tax on incomes over $4,000 tariff in 1894, and was supported by President Taft, Southern and Western farmers, and the Progressives (Foner, p. 718). They believed respectively that the government should wean off obtaining money from tariffs, and that the income tax should fairly correlate to a person’s income. Moreover, it was believed that the amendment would ameliorate the drastic income disparity, and that it would provide the government with more revenue for its increasing state budgets.
Abraham Lincoln became the United States ' 16th President in 1861, delivering the Emancipation Proclamation that declared forever free those slaves within the Confederacy in 1863. If there is a part of the United States History that best characterizes it, is the interminable fight for the Civil Rights. This he stated most movingly in dedicating the military cemetery at Gettysburg: "that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain--that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom--and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth. "The Declaration of Independence states “All men are created equal”.
After the Revolution, the country was left in an economic crisis and struggling for a cohesive path moving forward. The remaining financial obligations left some Founding Fathers searching for ways to create a stronger more centralized government to address concerns on a national level. The thought was that with a more centralized, concentrated governing body, the more efficient tensions and fiscal responsibilities could be addressed. With a central government manning these responsibilities, instead of the individual colonies, they would obtain consistent governing policies. However, as with many things in life, it was a difficult path with a lot of conflicting ideas and opponents. Much of the population was divided choosing either the
Section 1. of the Amendment XXVI of the Constitution of the United States (US) states that the right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age. Both houses of the Congress passed the amendment in March 1971.With thirty-eight states adopting it by July 1971; the 26th Amendment was ratified because the prerequisite for three-fourths of states approval had been achieved. President Nixon signed the amendment into law in the same year making the 26th constitutional amendment the quickest to ever be incorporated into the US Constitution. The amendment evoked diverse reactions amongst the public, with some saw it as a judicious
The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Amendments are part of the Bill of Rights which includes the first ten Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. These rights apply to the citizens of our great country. The Fourth Amendment covers search laws and has a significant impact on law enforcement procedures. If these procedural rights are not followed, there can be devastating consequences to the outcome of a case.
...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.”.
I think that executing a minor violates the 8th amendment, “No cruel or unusual punishment.” If a little kid makes a mistake and accidentally shoots a gun or does something that kills someone, and they are executed I think that that falls under cruel and unusual punishment.
The Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia met between May and September of 1787 to address the problems of the weak central government that existed under the Articles of Confederation. The Antifederalists were extremely concerned that the national government would trample their rights. Rhode Island and North Carolina refused to ratify until the framers added the Bill of Rights. These first ten amendments outlined things that the government could not do to its people. They are as such:
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.
What do you consider to be cruel and unusual punishment? Most people when asked this question think of medieval torture devices, burning people alive, and hard slave labor. However, cruel and unusual punishment, which is a protected against right by the eighth amendment, stretches far beyond these cliches and is still occurring in modern society. The case Miller v. Alabama and a parallel case, Jackson v. Hobbs deals with such punishments and brings up the questions of what, in current times, is to be considered cruel and unusual punishment. Miller v. Alabama addresses with the debate that arose surrounding the mandatory sentence of life without parole for a juvenile when two boys, fourteen-year-old Evan Miller and sixteen-year-old Colby Smith,
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.
The eighth amendment states that no person shall be submitted to cruel and unusual punishment. The question is whether or not this right is under attack from those who support the death penalty. When the bill of rights was created it was intended to stop judges from unruly, and unreasonable punishments of people who committed certain crimes. However in the day and age we live in now, the supreme court has placed provisions and rules on the use of the death penalty, and with its support it is threatening the idea of the eighth amendment, and those who oppose it.
... 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.
The Eighth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States asserts,” Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted,” (source Cornell). This amendment is being violated in the military today. These victims are being punished for being victims. Many victims are forced to leave the military after their attacks and do not receive proper medical attention. Victims are being cruelly treated for crimes committed against them.
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.