Cruel And Unusual Punishments: Tropp Vs. Far

In the United States Constitution, the 8th Amendment prohibits the use and practices of cruel and unusual punishment. What exactly is considered to be cruel and unusual punishment? This question is a hot topic among America's many different current controversies. Many people are saying that the use of capital punishment (to be sentenced to death as a penalty in the eyes of the law [a capital crime]. An execution [capital punishment]) is a direct violation of the 8th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States (Capital Punishment). They say there should be another way to deal with these criminals other than having them executed. The purpose of this paper is to give a brief history of the death penalty

That question is a debate that has been occuring for years. The supreme court has previously ruled that the dealth penalty is not cruel and unusual punishment there for it is not violating the eighth amendment in any way. Despite how the supreme court has ruled the death penalty, there is still many arguments till this day on whether or not it should fall under cruel and unusual punishment. In 1972, the case Furman V. Georgia was brought in front of the supreme court to rule whether or not they believed the dealth penality was cruel and unusual. This case almost ruled out the death penalty, but that didn't last very long. In 1976, the case Gregg V. Georgia came in front of the Supreme Court and the earlier decision was changed because a majority vote believed that the dealth penalty was not cruel and unusual. Eventually four principals were established to decided whether or not punishment was cruel and unusual. The four questions were, is it degrading to human dignity? Is it arbitary? Is it rejected throughout society? Is it unnecessary? Which many states ended up believing that the death penalty were along the lines of those four principals. Clayton Lockett might be a tragic example of the death penalty going bad. He was getting injected, but the injection didn't kill him up until an hour after it was injected. He had to sit there and suffer and many would of

David Figueroa Eng. 101A Professor Stern 4/20/15 Final draft In conclusion, in discussions of torture, one controversial issue has been on the use of it. On one hand, the people against torture argue that it is cruel and unusual punishment. On the other hand, those for torture argue that it should be used for the greater good. Others even maintain that under extreme circumstances, it may be admissible if it can save American lives. My own view is that no one should be subjected to cruel punishment because it is not only illegal, unreliable, ineffective, time consuming, it also has too many flaws that could potentially ruin innocent lives. The definition of torture is any act, whether physical or emotional, or maybe both, is intentionally subjected to a specific individual or a group for many reasons. Most of these reasons that torture is administered is for extracting information from an individual or just for punishing him/her for a crime that he/she has committed or is suspected of committing. The use of torture can be used to intimidate a person to give information that may be beneficial for a nation. The use of torture has been used for many centuries. The purposes of using torture have changed over the years as well as the methods in which a person is tortured. One crucial piece that has been established that separates us human beings from barbarians is the prohibition of using torture. There are many reasons why torture has been deemed a crime now in society. There are

The moral and ethical debate on the sentencing and enforcement of capital punishment has long baffled the citizens and governing powers of the United States. Throughout time, the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, and the vast majority beliefs of Americans, have been in a constant state of perplexity. Before the 1960s, the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution were interpreted as permitting the death penalty. However, in the early 1960s, it was suggested that the death penalty was a "cruel and unusual" punishment and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment. Many argue that capital punishment is an absolute necessity, in order to deter crime, and to ‘make things right’ following a heinous crime of murder. Despite the belief that capital punishment may seem to be the only tangible, permanent solution to ending future capital offenses, the United States should remove this cruel and unnecessary form of punishment from our current judicial systems.

The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment largely concerns itself with disproportionate and arbitrary punishments imposed by the government. “The Court has repeatedly emphasized the Eighth Amendment’s expansive and vital character and its capacity for evolutionary growth.” (Kanovitz, 2010) Cruelty is interpreted as actions that oppose current standards of decency. As public opinion grows and changes these standards are apt to change. The vague wording of the Eighth Amendment allows room for the opinion of what punishments are acceptable to adapt to modern times.

The most valued documents in modern American society tend also to be the most heavily debated. For instance, interpretations of the United States Constitution tend to be rooted in one of two firmly entrenched beliefs;while the first camp believes it to be set in stone, the second his convinced that the United States Constitution is by nature a perpetually evolving document, meant to reflect the desires and needs of the people. Even amongst those in the same camp, disagreements abound; those believing that the Constitution is set in stone are divided on issues such as the eighth amendment’s prohibition of ‘cruel and unusual punishment’. It is difficult to reach a consensus on what, constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. For example, the concept of waterboarding is championed by many as a ‘humane’ form of torture which causes no physical harm. However, it was deemed a cruel and unusual punishment due to the sensations of drowning and symptoms of mental illness which it produced in its victims. It can therefore be inferred that physical injury is not the only factor to be considered in whether or not a practice is to be deemed inhumane; factors such as mental wellbeing and fitness of punishment must also be considered. This leads one to ponder how the concept of solitary confinement could possibly even be considered when it so clearly violates the protections which the eighth amendment provides.

For thousands of years, punishment for crime has been met with several different styles of execution. In 1976, the United States government reinstalled the death penalty four short years after having banned it claiming that it "violated the Constitution 's ban on cruel and unusual punishment" (MacKinnon, "Ethics" 289). Since 1976, the morality of execution as just punishment has been a highly discussed topic. The death penalty is not morally permissible because dissolving one 's basic human right to life is wrong.

We repeatedly hear politicians referring back to the Constitution to affirm their point, it was a political document in the 18th century and it continues to be one now. One of the reasons that the Constitution continues to be successful, is because of the vague language that allows a variation of interpretations. There are many parts of the Constitution that sound outdated, thus it can be difficult for it to apply to the 21st Century. However, we should not change the document, we should instead apply those words to our lives today. As David Savage, a Supreme Court reporter clarifies “And then there are phrases like cruel and unusual punishment. It seems to me that phrase almost asks judges or justices to think what's cruel and unusual punishment today? The fact that someone could have been put to death in the 1700s, the 1800s, for a theft, even if the person was 12 years old or 15 years old, how many people would think that that is not cruel and unusual punishment today, to execute a 12-year-old?” (Savage, Is The Constitution A Living Or Dead Document?)

Article 12. No person shall be subject to cruel or unusual punishment. (U.S. Const. amend. VIII. 1791.)

Even though these individuals are criminals, their basic rights to food, bedding, and other necessities are to be met. By placing these men in solitary confinement for reasons that do not warrant isolation, this constitutes cruel and unusual

The supreme court made a ruling that determined that one’s punishment must be equal to the crime committed due to the eighth amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment. “The Court has attempted to simultaneously satisfy its moral inclinations and the text of the Constitution, but these efforts have resulted in an inconsistent and confusing Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause jurisprudence” (Ryan, 2010, p. 569).

A claim that prison officials used excessive force on an inmate and thereby inflicted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment involves both objective and subjective elements. Stanley v. Hejirika, 134 F.2d 629, 634 (4th Cir. 1998). The objective element of the analysis requires a determination of whether the defendants’ actions offend contemporary standards of decency. Hudson v. McMillian, 503 U.S. 1, 8 (1992). To answer this question, the Court weighs the need for the application of the force, the relationship between the need for the use of force and the amount of force used, the extent of the injury inflicted, the extent of the threat to the safety of staff and inmates as reasonably perceived by the defendants and any efforts made to temper the severity of the use of force. Whitley

held that the U.S. citizen held by the US Military in Virginia as an alleged enemy

My case is about a junior in high school and he calls a trial for cruel and unusual punishment. James Ingraham was a 8th grader at the time he was beat by the school principal with a paddle. He was paddled without any hearing that he was being punished and was hit 20 times and needed medical attention afterwards. During his beating, he was held down by the assistant principal, Lemmie Deliford, and by an aid, Solomon Barnes. This situation was relatable to another student named, Roosevelt Andrews, who was also paddled without any warning that he was being punished. They are fighting in court that it was cruel and unusual punishment and students should get a warning before getting punished. The students are fighting against the school for cruel

Moreover, the United States Constitution forbids any punishment that does not fit with the crime the offender has been accused of, especially if it is cruel and unusual (US Const. Amend. VIII). The roots of this amendment can be found within the clauses of the Magna