Is the Death Penalty Constitutional?

[Nous]

Yes it works, if implemented properly.

Vlad Tepes (look him up) put a golden chalice on the town's well. If anyone took it, they would be executed via impalement. Their bodies would be left to rot as well as feed carrion birds. The chalice stayed there for years during his reign.

That definitely doesn't address any issue of the constitutionality of the death penalty in the US.

 

[Smart_Guy]

The Eighth Amendment forbids punishments that are "cruel and unusual". By acknowledging that the death penalty is cruel, you are half-way there.

If you have any recommendations for more "strictly" investigating a death sentence, I'm sure authorities would like to know them. As of 15 years ago, each death sentence and execution in Florida entailed an expenditure of $23 million over and above the cost of housing, feeding and providing basic medical care for the inmate for the rest of his life (which I think is generally about $35,000 per year?); apparently this extra cost is mostly due to appeals and scrutiny of the case by courts. Even then, after ~12 years some 4% of actually innocent people are sentenced to death and executed, and some 60% receive trials in which there was judicial error. It seems to me these enormous amounts of money are better spent providing services and infrastructure for the vast numbers of law-abiding people rather than trying to extract an eye for an eye purely as retribution.

I meant generally a sever and extreme measure by cruel, sorry. My English has failed me again. By this, I decided that no, it is not cruel in nature, but could be cruel with unjust convection.

But anyways, if the rest of what you said is the case, then I say no to death penalty and it could be indeed possibly cruel then.

Not at all. People make false confessions to crimes all the time.
The Innocence Project has secured the exoneration of at least one (and maybe 2) people who falsely confessed to a murder.

By honest confessions I mean those said by related suspects, not suspects new to the scene. A fight, for example, starts and one side threatens to kill the other then does it in the presence of eye witnesses. I don't think a content confession by that suspect goes under the examples of false confession given earlier. The confessions at hand are also about death penalty, not just "crimes". It is already very well known that false confessions for just "crimes" are there.

I could be wrong tho.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Rarity doesn't mean unusual? What dictionary are you reading?

Many diseases are rare, but they aren't unusual.

 

[Ingledsva]

Except, imo, the "good" does not outweigh the bad because the "good" is also bad. The death penalty does not bring the one murdered back to life, nor does it prevent homicides as studies have shown, plus it's more expensive than life in prison on the average.

And, philosophically, "why do we kill people who kill people to show that killing people is wrong?".

People killed by KNOWN reactions to Aspirin and other medications don't come back to life either.

I have no problem with killing murderers, - just as the Bible doesn't.

Killing murderers does not "show that killing people is wrong."

It shows that there is a consequence for certain actions, - and people knowing that consequence, - and choosing to do it anyway, - thus accept the consequence, which is their death

*.

 

[metis]

People killed by KNOWN reactions to Aspirin and other medications don't come back to life either.

I have no problem with killing murderers, - just as the Bible doesn't.

Killing murderers does not "show that killing people is wrong."

It shows that there is a consequence for certain actions, - and people knowing that consequence, - and choosing to do it anyway, - thus accept the consequence, which is their death

*.

Didn't Jesus say "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"? Also, equating executions with dying from an accidental reaction to aspirin is not even close to being equivalent. Also, the Torah statements justifying executions was at a time period when we had no jails or prisons, but when we finally did build them, as the Talmud states, more than one execution throughout all of Israel for a period of seven years would be considered to be overly brutal.

Executions are built on a false premise, namely that people cannot change. Do you believe that to be true?

Also, many states, including my state of Michigan, has it that if one is convicted of first-degree murder, it's life in prison with no parole. IOW. they're out of circulation and will be kept for the rest of their life in a high-security prison.

Put the above all together, along with the higher cost of capital punishment, and there simply is no logical reason to execute anyone is a society that has prisons.

 

[Ingledsva]

Didn't Jesus say "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone"? Also, equating executions with dying from an accidental reaction to aspirin is not even close to being equivalent. Also, the Torah statements justifying executions was at a time period when we had no jails or prisons, but when we finally did build them, as the Talmud states, more than one execution throughout all of Israel for a period of seven years would be considered to be overly brutal.

Executions are built on a false premise, namely that people cannot change. Do you believe that to be true?

Also, many states, including my state of Michigan, has it that if one is convicted of first-degree murder, it's life in prison with no parole. IOW. they're out of circulation and will be kept for the rest of their life in a high-security prison.

Put the above all together, along with the higher cost of capital punishment, and there simply is no logical reason to execute anyone is a society that has prisons.

1. It is not "accidental reaction." They are KNOWN results - which is why they have to list them on the medication. They are still allowed to sell the medication, and the people taking it understand they could die. Certain amounts of death are obviously acceptable.

2. They definitely had trials and prison in Torah times, as well as the death penalty for far more then we do - such as "illicit" sex.

3. Most Pedophiles continue to go after children after being let out. Most Rapists continue to rape. Most criminals continue to be what they are - criminals. I'm not taking a chance with them.

4. Our system needs revision to get rid of ridiculous high costs. We do not have enough prisons to hold all criminals. Nor should we the people have to support the criminals for the rest of their lives.

5. As stated, I believe child rapists, and murderers, should be killed - as they chose to do the murder KNOWING the result would be their execution. I also believe all other criminals should have to pay for their incarceration, - as again - they chose to do the crime - thus accepting the incarceration.

*

 

[metis]

1. It is not "accidental reaction." They are KNOWN results - which is why they have to list them on the medication. They are still allowed to sell the medication, and the people taking it understand they could die. Certain amounts of death are obviously acceptable.

2. They definitely had trials and prison in Torah times, as well as the death penalty for far more then we do - such as "illicit" sex.

3. Most Pedophiles continue to go after children after being let out. Most Rapists continue to rape. Most criminals continue to be what they are - criminals. I'm not taking a chance with them.

4. Our system needs revision to get rid of ridiculous high costs. We do not have enough prisons to hold all criminals. Nor should we the people have to support the criminals for the rest of their lives.

5. As stated, I believe child rapists, and murderers, should be killed - as they chose to do the murder KNOWING the result would be their execution. I also believe all other criminals should have to pay for their incarceration, - as again - they chose to do the crime - thus accepting the incarceration.

*

The only thing that I am going to comment on with the above is just a reminder that Torah covers the time period when we were in the Sinai and previous to that whereas we had no prisons or jails.

 

[Ingledsva]

The only thing that I am going to comment on with the above is just a reminder that Torah covers the time period when we were in the Sinai and previous to that whereas we had no prisons or jails.

It is ridiculous to say they had no law, or holding places, during that time, or before. Every leader was a Judge. We have stories that show they did gather and make judgment.

Moses is supposedly given specific laws at this time, however, obviously they had laws and holding places for criminals before Egypt.

Supposedly clear back in Gen 6, God told Noah -

Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

We already have the kill over sex laws.

Gen 20:3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast taken; for she is a man's wife.

And by the way - they were not just wandering around the desert lost for 40 years (didn't happen.) Also in the story they went to named places like - Elim, Sin, Rephidim, (Rephidim is where they supposedly fought with Amalek.)

Again not lost - Jethro managed to find and come to them.

Exo 18:5 And Jethro, Moses' father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God:

Hummm! And Moses Judges - and appointed other people - These are BEFORE the Laws from the Mountain.

Exo 18:13 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.

Exo 18:25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.

Exo 18:26 And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.

*

 

[metis]

It is ridiculous to say they had no law, or holding places, during that time, or before. Every leader was a Judge. We have stories that show they did gather and make judgment.

Moses is supposedly given specific laws at this time, however, obviously they had laws and holding places for criminals before Egypt.

Supposedly clear back in Gen 6, God told Noah -

Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

We already have the kill over sex laws.

Gen 20:3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast taken; for she is a man's wife.

And by the way - they were not just wandering around the desert lost for 40 years (didn't happen.) Also in the story they went to named places like - Elim, Sin, Rephidim, (Rephidim is where they supposedly fought with Amalek.)

Again not lost - Jethro managed to find and come to them.

Exo 18:5 And Jethro, Moses' father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God:

Hummm! And Moses Judges - and appointed other people - These are BEFORE the Laws from the Mountain.

Exo 18:13 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.

Exo 18:25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.

Exo 18:26 And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves.

*

Prior to Joseph being in Egypt, we know almost nothing about the societal conditions we lived under, and therefore we cannot make any assumptions at all that we had prisons or jails. Indeed, that would have been an extreme rarity for a people that probably were mostly nomadic and also practicing animal husbandry and seed gathering. Nowhere is there a single mention of prisons or jails except in Egypt where it is mentioned (Genesis 39+).

Again, and this is my last post on this with you, there is no logical reason whatsoever for capital punishment in a society like ours that has prisons. It is unnecessarily brutal, imo, plus there's the chance that the wrong person can be executed, and this has happened, unfortunately. Years ago, I read a FBI estimate that maybe as high as 10% of our prison population are there for crimes they didn't commit. If one is executed, there's no way to bring that person back to life.

 

[Ingledsva]

*

INGLEDSVA - " It is ridiculous to say they had no law, or holding places, during that time, or before. Every leader was a Judge. We have stories that show they did gather and make judgment.

Moses is supposedly given specific laws at this time, however, obviously they had laws and holding places for criminals before Egypt.

Supposedly clear back in Gen 6, God told Noah -

Gen 9:6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

We already have the kill over sex laws.

Gen 20:3 But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, Behold, thou art but a dead man, for the woman which thou hast taken; for she is a man's wife.

And by the way - they were not just wandering around the desert lost for 40 years (didn't happen.) Also in the story they went to named places like - Elim, Sin, Rephidim, (Rephidim is where they supposedly fought with Amalek.)

Again not lost - Jethro managed to find and come to them.

Exo 18:5 And Jethro, Moses' father in law, came with his sons and his wife unto Moses into the wilderness, where he encamped at the mount of God:

Hummm! And Moses Judges - and appointed other people - These are BEFORE the Laws from the Mountain.

Exo 18:13 And it came to pass on the morrow, that Moses sat to judge the people: and the people stood by Moses from the morning unto the evening.

Exo 18:25 And Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.

Exo 18:26 And they judged the people at all seasons: the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged themselves."

Prior to Joseph being in Egypt, we know almost nothing about the societal conditions we lived under, and therefore we cannot make any assumptions at all that we had prisons or jails. Indeed, that would have been an extreme rarity for a people that probably were mostly nomadic and also practicing animal husbandry and seed gathering. Nowhere is there a single mention of prisons or jails except in Egypt where it is mentioned (Genesis 39+).

Again, and this is my last post on this with you, there is no logical reason whatsoever for capital punishment in a society like ours that has prisons. It is unnecessarily brutal, imo, plus there's the chance that the wrong person can be executed, and this has happened, unfortunately. Years ago, I read a FBI estimate that maybe as high as 10% of our prison population are there for crimes they didn't commit. If one is executed, there's no way to bring that person back to life.

*
It is ridiculous to assume people had no laws or lockups before Egypt.

Tying a sheep stealer up in a tent until trial is incarceration.

I've already shown you verses from before Egypt - that show some of these laws were already in practice.[/QUOTE]

 

[pearl]

Anyone have any predictions as to how SCOTUS justices will come down on the constitutionality of the dp?

 

[YmirGF]

Anyone have any predictions as to how SCOTUS justices will come down on the constitutionality of the dp?

Deplorable people?

 

[Nous]

Anyone have any predictions as to how SCOTUS justices will come down on the constitutionality of the dp?

There isn't a case challenging the constitutionality of capital punishment before the Court currently, and I am unaware of any case in the pipeline. In Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Court held that capital punishment for murder is not per se unconstitutional, and has reaffirmed that holding several times since in cases challenging the constitutionality of various methods of execution. I don't see the current Court overturning any of those holdings.

Fortunately many states have repealed their death penalty statutes, and several state Supreme Courts have found capital punishment to violate their constitutions.

 

[Nous]

There isn't a case challenging the constitutionality of capital punishment before the Court currently, and I am unaware of any case in the pipeline.

Well, I'm not very up to speed on this issue and shouldn't be spouting stuff off the top of my head. There is a case docketed for the October term, Madison v. Alabama, in which the Court will decide whether it violates the Eighth Amendment and case law to execute a man who has developed such severe dementia that he can't remember his crime or understand the circumstances for his scheduled execution.

 

[pearl]

I wonder if any decision follows the predictable conservative, moderate or liberal makeup of the Court and to what extent, if any, is due to personal beliefs.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Recently published figures showing executions of convicts in the US at a 25-year low reminded me of Justice Breyer’s dissent in Glossip v. Gross last term, in which he makes an impeccable case that the death penalty is infliction of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the the Eighth Amendment: GLOSSIP v. GROSS I encourage anyone who is doubtful of the death penalty’s unconstitutionality to read it.

Because of its excellence, I wish to summarize some of his points, beginning toward his ending. Quoting Atkins v. Virginia (which quotes Enmund v. Florida), he notes that “if the the death penalty does not fulfill the goals of deterrence or retribution, ‘it is nothing more than the purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering and hence an unconstitutional punishment.’” But the death penalty can’t fulfill the goal of deterrence because, as demonstrated by unequivocal evidence that Breyer cites, it actually is an unusual punishment (and thereby serving one criterion of its unconstitutionality):

. . . if we look to States, in more than 60% there is effectively no death penalty, in an additional 18% an execution is rare and unusual, and 6%, i.e., three States, account for 80% of all executions. If we look to population, about 66% of the Nation lives in a State that has not carried out an execution in the last three years. And if we look to counties, in 86% there is effectively no death penalty. It seems fair to say that it is now unusual to find capital punishment in the United States, at least when we consider the Nation as a whole. See Furman, 408 U. S., at 311 (1972) (White, J., concurring) (executions could be so infrequently carried out that they “would cease to be a credible deterrent or measurably to contribute to any other end of punishment in the criminal justice system . . . when imposition of the penalty reaches a certain degree of infrequency, it would be very doubtful that any existing general need for retribution would be measurably satisfied”).

Punishment by death is also unusual on the international scene, at least among developed countries: Capital punishment by country - Wikipedia

One of the primary reasons that so many states have either repealed or abandoned their death penalty statutes is due to the stunning cost. A 2008 report by a California Commission found that the death penalty costs the state $137 million per year whereas comparable life sentences without parole would cost $11.5 million per year. A 2000 investigative report in the Palm Beach Post calculated that each execution in Florida cost an additional $23 million above a sentence of life without parole.

Going back to Breyer’s beginning, he argues 3 different grounds on which the death penalty is cruel, easily fulfilling the first prong of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition (1) its lack of reliability; (2) its arbitrariness; and (3) the excessive delays by which it is carried out.

Breyer explains that, despite the difficulty of investigating crimes that took place long ago, the evidence is unquestionable that in just the past few decades people who have essentially been proven innocent have been executed. He cites 3 such cases, one of whom was posthumously pardoned. These executions of innocents are in addition to the many cases in which the death penalty has been unjustly imposed, including, as of 2014, 175 exonerations prior to execution. Breyer notes (his emphasis):

[E]xonerations occur far more frequently where capital convictions, rather than ordinary criminal convictions, are at issue. Researchers have calculated that courts (or State Governors) are 130 times more likely to exonerate a defendant where a death sentence is at issue. They are nine times more likely to exonerate where a capital murder, rather than a noncapital murder, is at issue. Exonerations 2012 Report 15–16, and nn. 24–26.

Why is that so? To some degree, it must be because the law that governs capital cases is more complex. To some degree, it must reflect the fact that courts scrutinize capital cases more closely. But, to some degree, it likely also reflects a greater likelihood of an initial wrongful conviction. How could that be so? In the view of researchers who have conducted these studies, it could be so because the crimes at issue in capital cases are typically horrendous murders, and thus accompanied by intense community pressure on police, prosecutors, and jurors to secure a conviction. This pressure creates a greater likelihood of convicting the wrong person. See Gross, Jacoby, Matheson, Montgomery, & Patil, Exonerations in the United States 1989 Through 2003, 95 J. Crim. L. & C. 523, 531–533 (2005); Gross & O’Brien, Frequency and Predictors of False Conviction: Why We Know So Little, and New Data on Capital Cases, 5 J. Empirical L. Studies 927, 956–957 (2008) (noting that, in comparing those who were exonerated from death row to other capital defendants who were not so exonerated, the initial police investigations tended to be shorter for those exonerated); see also B. Garrett, Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong (2011) (discussing other common causes of wrongful convictions generally including false confessions, mistaken eyewitness testimony, untruthful jailhouse informants, and ineffective defense counsel).

(Continued . . .)

It's only unconstitutional if due process isn't carried out.

 

[idav]

Recently published figures showing executions of convicts in the US at a 25-year low reminded me of Justice Breyer’s dissent in Glossip v. Gross last term, in which he makes an impeccable case that the death penalty is infliction of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the the Eighth Amendment: GLOSSIP v. GROSS I encourage anyone who is doubtful of the death penalty’s unconstitutionality to read it.

Because of its excellence, I wish to summarize some of his points, beginning toward his ending. Quoting Atkins v. Virginia (which quotes Enmund v. Florida), he notes that “if the the death penalty does not fulfill the goals of deterrence or retribution, ‘it is nothing more than the purposeless and needless imposition of pain and suffering and hence an unconstitutional punishment.’” But the death penalty can’t fulfill the goal of deterrence because, as demonstrated by unequivocal evidence that Breyer cites, it actually is an unusual punishment (and thereby serving one criterion of its unconstitutionality):

. . . if we look to States, in more than 60% there is effectively no death penalty, in an additional 18% an execution is rare and unusual, and 6%, i.e., three States, account for 80% of all executions. If we look to population, about 66% of the Nation lives in a State that has not carried out an execution in the last three years. And if we look to counties, in 86% there is effectively no death penalty. It seems fair to say that it is now unusual to find capital punishment in the United States, at least when we consider the Nation as a whole. See Furman, 408 U. S., at 311 (1972) (White, J., concurring) (executions could be so infrequently carried out that they “would cease to be a credible deterrent or measurably to contribute to any other end of punishment in the criminal justice system . . . when imposition of the penalty reaches a certain degree of infrequency, it would be very doubtful that any existing general need for retribution would be measurably satisfied”).

Punishment by death is also unusual on the international scene, at least among developed countries: Capital punishment by country - Wikipedia

One of the primary reasons that so many states have either repealed or abandoned their death penalty statutes is due to the stunning cost. A 2008 report by a California Commission found that the death penalty costs the state $137 million per year whereas comparable life sentences without parole would cost $11.5 million per year. A 2000 investigative report in the Palm Beach Post calculated that each execution in Florida cost an additional $23 million above a sentence of life without parole.

Going back to Breyer’s beginning, he argues 3 different grounds on which the death penalty is cruel, easily fulfilling the first prong of the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition (1) its lack of reliability; (2) its arbitrariness; and (3) the excessive delays by which it is carried out.

Breyer explains that, despite the difficulty of investigating crimes that took place long ago, the evidence is unquestionable that in just the past few decades people who have essentially been proven innocent have been executed. He cites 3 such cases, one of whom was posthumously pardoned. These executions of innocents are in addition to the many cases in which the death penalty has been unjustly imposed, including, as of 2014, 175 exonerations prior to execution. Breyer notes (his emphasis):

[E]xonerations occur far more frequently where capital convictions, rather than ordinary criminal convictions, are at issue. Researchers have calculated that courts (or State Governors) are 130 times more likely to exonerate a defendant where a death sentence is at issue. They are nine times more likely to exonerate where a capital murder, rather than a noncapital murder, is at issue. Exonerations 2012 Report 15–16, and nn. 24–26.

Why is that so? To some degree, it must be because the law that governs capital cases is more complex. To some degree, it must reflect the fact that courts scrutinize capital cases more closely. But, to some degree, it likely also reflects a greater likelihood of an initial wrongful conviction. How could that be so? In the view of researchers who have conducted these studies, it could be so because the crimes at issue in capital cases are typically horrendous murders, and thus accompanied by intense community pressure on police, prosecutors, and jurors to secure a conviction. This pressure creates a greater likelihood of convicting the wrong person. See Gross, Jacoby, Matheson, Montgomery, & Patil, Exonerations in the United States 1989 Through 2003, 95 J. Crim. L. & C. 523, 531–533 (2005); Gross & O’Brien, Frequency and Predictors of False Conviction: Why We Know So Little, and New Data on Capital Cases, 5 J. Empirical L. Studies 927, 956–957 (2008) (noting that, in comparing those who were exonerated from death row to other capital defendants who were not so exonerated, the initial police investigations tended to be shorter for those exonerated); see also B. Garrett, Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong (2011) (discussing other common causes of wrongful convictions generally including false confessions, mistaken eyewitness testimony, untruthful jailhouse informants, and ineffective defense counsel).

(Continued . . .)

Yes it’s cruel and unusual punishments. Just as they found capital punishment for rape as cruel and unusaual I don’t see why it couldn’t be ruled the same for murder. Most free countries have more or less abolished capital punishment which makes it cruel and unusual on the word stage.

 

[Nous]

I wonder if any decision follows the predictable conservative, moderate or liberal makeup of the Court and to what extent, if any, is due to personal beliefs.

In recent cases (which are cases challenging method of execution), the opinions on the US Supreme Court have strictly followed a "left"/"right" divide--to an abnormal degree. However, Justice Stevens was the third joiner of the opinion that constituted the plurality opinion in Gregg that reinstated the death penalty in 1976. In one of his post-retirement books, Stevens said that he regretted his decision in that case, and that he would not have joined such an opinion to reinstate today.

 

[Nous]

It's only unconstitutional if due process isn't carried out.

Then apparently you consider capital punishment unconstitutional, given that Justice Breyer cites data showing that in an inordinate percentage of capital punishment cases, the persons convicted and sentenced to death are actually innocent (e.g., proven by DNA evidence), and in a much larger percentage of cases wrongful convictions (e.g., for procedural errors) occur significantly more often than in non-death penalty cases.

 

[Nous]

Yes it’s cruel and unusual punishments. Just as they found capital punishment for rape as cruel and unusaual I don’t see why it couldn’t be ruled the same for murder. Most free countries have more or less abolished capital punishment which makes it cruel and unusual on the word stage.

It should be noted that in the decisions where state Supreme Courts have found their capital punishment statutes to violate their constitutions, they have done so by employing the same manner of reasoning and the same sorts of facts and figures as Justice Breyer did in his dissent in Glossip.

In any case, at the moment the most fruitful course for abolishing capital punishment is by state-by-state referenda, legislation, and state court decisions. At the federal level, about the best one can do is bemoan the fact that the US Supreme Court won't strike down the death penalty as a violation of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause.