Furman V. Georgia
The Constitutional Regulation of Capital Punishment Since Furman v. Georgia
Background:
The main argument in this article is that the Supreme Court has failed in their duties to regulate the death penalty. This purported failure is attributed to the Supreme Court not following their own terms and their high-profile involvement in overseeing state and federal death penalty practices (Steiker & Steiker, 1998). The authors argue that the Court’s high profile involvement is in fact creating a “False but powerful impression that the death penalty practices have, in fact, been meaningfully transformed” (Steiker & Steiker, 1998, para. 4).
Since Furman v. Georgia and subsequent cases, the main goal of the Court has been on accuracy and fairness …show more content…
Georgia. Was capital punishment a violation of the 8th Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment? The majority of the Court deemed it was not since “Capital punishment accords with contemporary standards of decency, capital punishment may serve some deterrent or retributive purpose that is not degrading to human dignity, and in the case of the Georgia law under review, capital punishment is no longer arbitrarily applied” (Gregg v. Georgia, 1976, p. 1). The difference between this case and Furman v. Georgia is that previously the Court had ruled that the death penalty methods as administered back then were unconstitutional, not the actual idea of the death penalty …show more content…
Georgia is the most sensible. The reason being is that the Justice’s arguments are clear and not overly fraught with personal/emotional opinion. Their position on the issue was to determine the facts of the constitution and the crimes being committed, as well as which would be deemed fit for capital punishment. While the EU and the Steikers made some valid arguments as well there was just a little too much conjecture for me and the EU had an overabundance of emotion throughout. That being said, no justice system is without flaws. However, anytime you are dealing with a controversial topic, personal opinion and emotions do nothing to help the situation, but instead only serve to aggravate it. The state of our country currently is a perfect example of why emotions and government/politics don’t
Background:
The main argument in this article is that the Supreme Court has failed in their duties to regulate the death penalty. This purported failure is attributed to the Supreme Court not following their own terms and their high-profile involvement in overseeing state and federal death penalty practices (Steiker & Steiker, 1998). The authors argue that the Court’s high profile involvement is in fact creating a “False but powerful impression that the death penalty practices have, in fact, been meaningfully transformed” (Steiker & Steiker, 1998, para. 4).
Since Furman v. Georgia and subsequent cases, the main goal of the Court has been on accuracy and fairness …show more content…
Georgia. Was capital punishment a violation of the 8th Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment? The majority of the Court deemed it was not since “Capital punishment accords with contemporary standards of decency, capital punishment may serve some deterrent or retributive purpose that is not degrading to human dignity, and in the case of the Georgia law under review, capital punishment is no longer arbitrarily applied” (Gregg v. Georgia, 1976, p. 1). The difference between this case and Furman v. Georgia is that previously the Court had ruled that the death penalty methods as administered back then were unconstitutional, not the actual idea of the death penalty …show more content…
Georgia is the most sensible. The reason being is that the Justice’s arguments are clear and not overly fraught with personal/emotional opinion. Their position on the issue was to determine the facts of the constitution and the crimes being committed, as well as which would be deemed fit for capital punishment. While the EU and the Steikers made some valid arguments as well there was just a little too much conjecture for me and the EU had an overabundance of emotion throughout. That being said, no justice system is without flaws. However, anytime you are dealing with a controversial topic, personal opinion and emotions do nothing to help the situation, but instead only serve to aggravate it. The state of our country currently is a perfect example of why emotions and government/politics don’t