Is Capital Punishment Constitutional?

The death penalty is the punishment of execution, administered to someone legally convicted of a capital crime (law.cornell.edu, 2015). The first Congress of the United States authorized the federal death penalty on June 25, 1790 (deathpenalty.org, 2011). The death penalty can also be referred to as capital punishment, however capital punishment also includes a sentence to life in prison, as opposed to strictly executions. A convict can be sentenced to death by various methods including lethal injection, electrocution, gas chamber, firing squad, and hanging. After the death penalty was established, many debates have arisen arguing that these methods violate several of the United States’ Amendments. Select cases have been accused of violating the Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments. It is important to note that the judiciary goes through a series of processes prior to deciding a sentence for a capital crime. Many factors influencing the verdict include proportional analysis, individualized sentencing, method of execution, and classes of people not eligible of the death penalty. This paper will discuss brief descriptions of the methods used for executions, economical issues, the Supreme Court’s opinion regarding the death penalty, as well as important factors that make up the proportional analysis, individual sentencing process, method used, and determining classes of people who are not eligible for the death penalty.

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.

Capital punishment is never morally justified, and feminist, progressive and socialist ethics would always consider the social and family environment that produced the criminal in the first place, including poverty, racism, segregation or other types of oppression. It would also examine ways that society could be reformed on restricted in ways that would reduce oppression, such as ending the ghettoization of minorities or the extreme inequality between rich and poor in the United States. Indeed, inequality is more extreme in the U.S, than any other Western nation, the prison population is larger and the social safety net much weaker. These conditions have worsened during the present recession, particularly for blacks and Hispanics. Among Western nations, only the U.S. still practices capital punishment even though there was a moratorium in 1967-77 because of Supreme Court rulings. Feminist ethics would also emphasize caring, community, empathy and interpersonal relationships instead of morality based on following rules and regulations (Volbrect 17). Their response to the death penalty as well as war and other forms of public or state-sanctioned violence would therefore be pacifist, and demand social, economic and cultural change rather than punishment of perpetrators.

The use of capital punishment in the U.S. is a growing concern for most American citizens. According to statistics, seventy percent of Americans are in support of the death penalty, while only thirty percent are against it. These statistics show that few people are against capital punishment (“Fact” 1). With the use of the death penalty growing the controversy is becoming more heated. With only twelve states left not enforcing it the resistance is becoming futile (“Fact” 4). Many debates have been made and even clauses have been invoked, such as, the “Cruel and Unusual Clause” that was invoked by the Supreme Court in 1962 (Meltsner 179). The use of death as a punishment has been viewed as “cruel

Capital punishment, the state imposed penalty of death, continues to be one of the most controversial issues in contemporary American public policy. Since the earliest days of its employment in the colonial era until today, citizens have struggles with the issue of when and under what circumstances the taking of a human life by the state can be morally or legally justified. For some opponents of the death penalty, the simple answer is that the taking of a human life is always morally and ethically wrong, even when conducted under the auspices of state authority as a legal punishment. In contrast, proponents of capital punishment have contended with equal fervor that the death penalty is morally justified as a form of retributive justice,

A question that has been asked since the foundation of our country was made is, “Can the death penalty be considered Constitutional?” Thomas Jefferson was known to have written letters with the same topic. Now only thirty-one states, along with the federal government, still believe that the death penalty is within the boundaries of the Constitution. Twenty executions of the death penalty occurred last year, 2016, and approximately 1500 have since the 1970s (Pennekamp).

On September 9, 1993 a seventeen year old boy, Christopher Simmons, and his a few of his friends met up to discuss and devise a plan to commit a robbery and maybe even a murder, just for fun. Simmons’ plan was not complicated: find someone to burglarize, tie up the victim and either leave the victim tied to a tree or push them off a bridge. Simmons and his accomplice went through a window that was slightly cracked and proceeded into the bedroom of Mrs. Crook. The two teenagers tried the woman up and loaded her into the back of her minivan. They drove to the state park at the edge of town where they had planned to dispose of the body and that is exactly what they did. The boys were caught later on that month put on trial for murder in

Why should the death penalty be legal in every U.S. state? There are crimes that are so utterly odious that no amount of jail time will be ever punishment enough. Although personally not a fan of the death penalty, these most common arguments in its support might change one’s mind.

Since the 1970 's, almost all capital sentences in the United States have been imposed for homicide. There have been intense debates among Americans regarding the constitutionality of capital punishment. Critics charge that executions are violations of the “cruel and unusual punishment” provision of the Eighth Amendment; while supporters of the death penalty counter that this clause was not intended to prohibit legal executions. In the 1972 court case of Furman vs. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that capital punishment was no longer legal. However, in Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the court allowed capital punishments to resume in certain states, and shortly thereafter, Gary Gilmore was executed by a firing squad in Utah. Since the reinstatement of capital punishment in the United States, a separate penalty trial has been required for some capital cases, at which time the jury reviews circumstances that suggest the need for capital punishment. In 1982, Texas became the first state to execute a prisoner using lethal injection; other common methods of execution used in the United States include lethal gas and electrocution.

Across America there are 27 different states that have the death penalty. there are reasons that the death penalty should be used for example when someone kills other people or a group of people they should be put in the court with the death penalty to be an option.

The constitutionality of the death penalty has been a heated topic of discussion for decades. The history of the death penalty in the United States is extensive; from a suspension to a reinstating and individual statutes throughout the 50 states. One of the most controversial of the Supreme Court cases involving the death penalty is Roper v. Simmons. In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that the execution of people who were under 18 at the time of their crimes violates the federal constitutional guarantee against cruel and unusual punishments. In making its decision, the Court considered both the emerging national consensus and psychological organizations citing new evidence of delayed brain maturation that impacts culpability (define this

Although the death penalty is as ancient as civilization, it has proven throughout the years that it serves no purpose under a democratic system. Civilization began as a cruel and unusual system that ascended through barbaric drudgery; however, as our nation is established on basic principles of human rights and human dignity, maintaining the death penalty in the United States appears to be a dissonance to the Constitutional amendment which states that cruel and unusual punishment shall not be required. This nation, the so-called land of the free and the home of the brave, nevertheless, continues a legislation that is pursued by undemocratic authoritarian states, while lagging behind the most developed nations in the judicial progress. An

This paper will discuss the history of the death penalty, the cost of the death penalty, and its arguments under the law. For many years the death penalty has been utilized to punish the individuals who have committed crimes to the fullest extent that the law will allow, with a slight disagreement surrounding the death penalty. Some of the concerns would be are the criminals rightfully being held to pay for their actions, rather than taking their lives for the crime. In addition, the cost of the death penalty is rather expensive, and lastly the arguments surrounding the death penalty under the law. This paper state a strongly believe that the death penalty is not effective.

Should capital punishment be abolish? The answer should definitely be, no. Without the death penalty, criminals would oppose the law more aggressively. Criminals would openly do as they like, because they would no longer have the restriction from the law. Meaning without the law, the crime rate would escalate greatly. Yet in light of this importance, opponents (against capital punishment) offer their oppositional viewpoints. They combat what they consider the menace of social order. They question: whether or not capital punishment is lawful, or flawless. They contend, it is a law against justice and humanity. And laws should not permit the killing of human-beings. These people (abolitionists) would suggest it promote more crime rather than prevent crimes. (In spite of the debate it actually does the opposite.)

Capital punishment, better known as the death penalty, is the act of killing or executing a person who was found guilty of a serious crime, by the government. Capital punishment became widespread during the Middle Ages and was applied throughout Western Europe for more than two thousand years. Although, the call to abolish it started in the 18th century, some of the first countries being Venezuela in 1863, San Marino in 1865, and Costa Rica in 1877. Great Britain abolished the death penalty in 1965 and was permanently outlawed in 1969. By 2004, eighty-one countries had abolished capital punishment, but some countries in the Caribbean, Africa and Asia still use it for ordinary crimes. At present day, China and the United States apply the