Eighth Amendment US Constitution PDF

The Eighth Amendment “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”  How the founders saw “Cruel and unusual punishment” in 1789 Cruel and unusual: NOT cruel and unusual: Whippings of mo...

The Eighth Amendment “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.”  How the founders saw “Cruel and unusual punishment” in 1789 Cruel and unusual: NOT cruel and unusual: Whippings of more than 40 Whippings of less than 40 lashings lashings Cutting off hands Piercing of the tongue with hot Burning at the stake iron Cutting off ears Death penalty for burglary or Death penalty for murder, rape robbery Public humiliation disembowelment  Trop v Dulles, 1959 The definition of “cruel and unusual punishment” must change over time Court will refer to the “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” What was considered acceptable in the past may be considered cruel in the future if society's standard of decency has evolved to reject the practice  Furman v. Georgia, 1972 Justice Brennan wrote, "There are four principles by which we may determine whether a particular punishment is 'cruel and unusual'.” 1.The most important thing is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity," especially torture. 2."A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary (random or unpredictable) fashion." 3."A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society." 4."A severe punishment that is patently (completely) unnecessary."  Atkins v Virginia (2002) The Eighth Amendment should be interpreted in light of the "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." The best evidence on this score was determined to be the judgment of state legislatures. A national consensus that the mentally retarded should not be executed had emerged Unless it can be shown that executing the mentally retarded promotes the goals of retribution and deterrence, doing so is nothing more than "purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering", making the death penalty cruel and unusual in those cases  Roper v Simmons (2005) Under the "evolving standards of decency" test, the Court held that it was cruel and unusual punishment to execute a person who was under the age of 18 at the time of the murder. Sociological and scientific research that found that juveniles have a lack of maturity and sense of responsibility compared to adults In support of the "national consensus" position, the Court noted the increasing in frequency with which states were applying capital punishment for juvenile offenders Looked to practices in other countries to support the holding: only seven countries other than the United States ha[d] executed juvenile offenders  Graham v Florida (2009) The Eighth Amendment Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause does not permit a juvenile offender to be sentenced to life in prison without parole for a non- homicidal crime Life sentences for juveniles for non-homicidal crimes has been "rejected the world over.” Juvenile offenders are generally less culpable than adults who commit the same crimes.  Death Penalty and Felony Murder The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution does not prohibit imposing the death penalty for felony murder Enmund v. Florida, (1982), the death penalty may not be imposed on someone who did not kill, attempt to kill, or intend that a killing take place. However, under Tison v. Arizona, (1987), the death penalty may be imposed on someone who was a major participant in the underlying felony and acted with reckless indifference to human life.