preview

The Roper V. Simmons Civil Liberties Case

Good Essays

Brendan Wang
Professor Ashkettle
AP Government Period 5
3 November 2017
The Roper v. Simmons Civil Liberties Case As children, we have all stepped that “boundary” between right and wrong. From stealing money to shoplifting to fighting, we have all made our parents frustrated, made poor decisions, and perhaps, even made a egregious mistake. However, when does stepping that “boundary” become irremediable? Can the government punish minors under the same criteria they do with adults? And most importantly, what does the United States Constitution say? These are all questions that both the Missouri Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court had to consider when they dived into the case of Roper v. Simmons. To provide a little historical …show more content…

Roper, the sentencing of minors would be legal, constitutional and uphold Stanford v. Kentucky; conversely, if the court ruled in favor of the defendant Christopher Simmons, the death sentence of both Simmons and all future juvenile convicts would be considered “cruel and unusual” according to the Eighth Amendment and effectively overturn Stanford v. Kentucky. The big day was March 1st, 2005. The verdict was reached and the decisions were made in the Rehnquist Court. The Chief Justice William Rehnquist ruled against Simmons, the defendant. Being a strict constructionist, or one that strictly adheres to the Constitution, this decision was consistent with his beliefs because nowhere in the Constitution does it say that the execution of minors is a cruel or unusual punishment. He reasoned that it was justified based on the defendant’s actions. Justice Sandra Day O’Connor is also a strict constructionist, believing in loyalty to the original Constitution and also in judicial restraint, where she tends to support previous judicial rulings. In this case, she was somewhat consistent, since she voted against Simmons as well and voted to uphold the previous ruling (Stanford v. Kentucky), which ruled that the death sentence of minors was permissible. In fact, she even responded to the argument that many international laws have denounced execution of minors and death penalty in general by stating that international law should have no relevance on the supreme law of the United

Get Access