Cruel and Unusual Punishment
The 8th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. You know the one. That's the one that forbids punishments that are "cruel and unusual." So we hope.
Whenever the death penalty is debated, invariably, the 8th Amendment is at the center of that discussion. It was last year when in a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the juvenile death penalty stating it violated the 8th Amendment's prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishments."
But that was last year.
Two members of the dissent have been known to argue quite the interpretation of the 8th Amendment. They believe the U.S Constitution protects cruel punishment. They also believe the U.S. Constitution protects unusual punishment. What it doesn't protect, according to their creative view, is punishment that is BOTH cruel and unusual. But one or the other is fine.
Now there are two new members of the Supreme Court, and there is genuine concern that both may share this view.
Should we be worried? Hasn't the Supreme Court already settled this issue?
Hardly. We've spent the last year torturing prisoners and abusing detainees. What happens when these issues come before the Supreme Court? What happens if our Supreme Court informs the world that our Constitution protects such conduct?
Whenever the death penalty is debated, invariably, the 8th Amendment is at the center of that discussion. It was last year when in a 5-4 ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the juvenile death penalty stating it violated the 8th Amendment's prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishments."
But that was last year.
Two members of the dissent have been known to argue quite the interpretation of the 8th Amendment. They believe the U.S Constitution protects cruel punishment. They also believe the U.S. Constitution protects unusual punishment. What it doesn't protect, according to their creative view, is punishment that is BOTH cruel and unusual. But one or the other is fine.
Now there are two new members of the Supreme Court, and there is genuine concern that both may share this view.
Should we be worried? Hasn't the Supreme Court already settled this issue?
Hardly. We've spent the last year torturing prisoners and abusing detainees. What happens when these issues come before the Supreme Court? What happens if our Supreme Court informs the world that our Constitution protects such conduct?