Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 25, 2014, 12:33:25 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Atlas Hardware Upgrade complete October 13, 2013.

+  Atlas Forum
|-+  General Discussion
| |-+  Constitution and Law (Moderator: True Federalist)
| | |-+  Death penalty ruled 'cruel and unusual' - Furman v. Georgia, 1972
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Print
Poll
Question: The ruling was constitutionally...
sound   -22 (61.1%)
unsound   -14 (38.9%)
Show Pie Chart
Total Voters: 36

Author Topic: Death penalty ruled 'cruel and unusual' - Furman v. Georgia, 1972  (Read 8312 times)
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30733
United States


View Profile
« on: December 26, 2005, 08:09:11 pm »
Ignore

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furman_v._Georgia

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0408_0238_ZS.html

"Does the imposition and carrying out of the death penalty in [these cases] constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments?"

403 U.S. 952 (1971). The Court holds that the imposition [p240] and carrying out of the death penalty in these cases constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments. The judgment in each case is therefore reversed insofar as it leaves undisturbed the death sentence imposed, and the cases are remanded for further proceedings.

So ordered.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN, MR. JUSTICE STEWART, MR. JUSTICE WHITE, and MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL have filed separate opinions in support of the judgments. THE CHIEF JUSTICE, MR. JUSTICE BLACKMUN, MR. JUSTICE POWELL, and MR. JUSTICE REHNQUIST have filed separate dissenting opinions.



This ruling caused the effective suspension of the death penalty until better consistency between the states could be imposed.
« Last Edit: December 26, 2005, 08:13:32 pm by Joe Republic »Logged



Real Americans (and Big Sky Bob) demand to know.


I just slept for 11 hours, so I should need a nap today, but we'll see.
Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 26, 2005, 08:20:07 pm »
Ignore

Unsound. The Constitution explicitly acknowledges capital punishment in no fewer than four cases:

- "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury." (Fifth Amendment)

- "No person shall ... be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." (Fifth Amendment)

- "No person shall ... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." (Fifth Amendment)

- "No State shall ... deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." (Fourteenth Amendment)

The Eighth Amendment should be interpreted consistently with the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. Since the Constitution explicitly recognizes the validity of capital punishment in not one but four places, capital punishment cannot be considered cruel or unusual. Imposing a national moratorium on the death penalty was nothing but judicial activism.
Logged
dazzleman
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 13821
Political Matrix
E: 1.88, S: 1.59

View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 26, 2005, 08:24:11 pm »
Ignore

Another activist court ruling.  It was a very bad period for the Supreme Court.
Logged
Jim Valvano
Liberty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1318
United States


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 26, 2005, 08:52:42 pm »
Ignore

Another ruling which demonstrates how much of an oxymoron their title of 'Justice' is. One of the most glaring  and obvious acts of judicial activism ever.
Logged

I will thank God for the day and the moment I have.
True Federalist
Ernest
Moderator
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 28471
United States


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 26, 2005, 09:18:06 pm »

Generally sound.  Brennan's and Marshall's concurrences (they were the only two who found the death penalty totally unconstitutinal) were unsound.  But the basic finding that the inequitible application of the death penalty constitutes "unusual punishment" is sound.

Woodson v. North Carolina was unsound, but not Furman v. Georgia.
Logged

My ballot:
Ervin(I) Gov.
Sellers(D) Lt. Gov.
Hammond(R) Sec. of State
Diggs(D) Att. Gen.
Herbert(D) Comptroller Gen.
Spearman(R) Supt. of Education
DeFelice(American) Commissioner of Agriculture
Hutto(D/Working Families) US Sen (full)
Scott(R) US Sen (special)
Geddings(Labor) US House SC-2
Quinn(R) SC House District 69
TBD: Lex 1 School Board
Yes: Am. 1 (allow charity raffles)
No: Am. 2 (end election of the Adj. General)
No: Local Sales Tax
Yes: Temp Beer/Wine Permits
Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 26, 2005, 09:20:45 pm »
Ignore

But the basic finding that the inequitible application of the death penalty constitutes "unusual punishment" is sound.
At most, the Justices could have found that the death penalty was inequitably applied in the case immediately before them. They had no authority to impose a national moratorium on the death penalty, merely because the defendants before them at the time may have been treated unfairly.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35678
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 26, 2005, 11:07:52 pm »
Ignore

Couldn't it be argued that the death penalty is 'depriving life'?
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23836
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 26, 2005, 11:13:34 pm »
Ignore

Couldn't it be argued that the death penalty is 'depriving life'?

It is depriving life, without a doubt. You seem to be ignoring the 'without due process' part.
Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 35678
United States


Political Matrix
E: -8.52, S: -8.00

View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 26, 2005, 11:21:16 pm »
Ignore

Couldn't it be argued that the death penalty is 'depriving life'?

It is depriving life, without a doubt. You seem to be ignoring the 'without due process' part.

That's true.  All those two lines really do is ban lynching.
Logged

in a mirror, dimly lit
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23836
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 26, 2005, 11:27:17 pm »
Ignore

Well, a state can't really 'lynch' someone. Anything authorized by law is due process of law.
Logged
Peter
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 6066


Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -7.48

View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 27, 2005, 01:49:43 pm »
Ignore

But the basic finding that the inequitible application of the death penalty constitutes "unusual punishment" is sound.
At most, the Justices could have found that the death penalty was inequitably applied in the case immediately before them. They had no authority to impose a national moratorium on the death penalty, merely because the defendants before them at the time may have been treated unfairly.

There was ample evidence of inherent problems in sentencing regimes that were being used, especially in the Southern States. If a death penalty statute or its general application is violating equal protection, the statute cannot be allowed to stand, and thus must be struck down.

This has the obvious effect of creating a "moratorium" on the death penalty. It perhaps should not have created a national moratorium in the way that it did, but rather said that Georgia's regime was and laid out a basic framework for the Circuits to follow to decide whether such equal protection problems existed in the other States, but the underlying judgement that some sentencing schemes, and specifically the one of Georgia, were violating equal protection was sound.
Logged

Retarded babies should be fed to crocodiles.
Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 27, 2005, 02:01:42 pm »
Ignore

There was ample evidence of inherent problems in sentencing regimes that were being used, especially in the Southern States. If a death penalty statute or its general application is violating equal protection, the statute cannot be allowed to stand, and thus must be struck down.
If I recall correctly, the Court's decision was based on the Eighth Amendment rather than the equal protection clause.

I believe that the Supreme Court did not find any evidence of racial bias against the defendant. Rather, it considered general statistics relating to the application of capital punishment in other cases. Such an approach is wholly inappropriate, in my opinion.
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 31, 2005, 07:09:50 am »
Ignore

They struck down the Death Penalty laws in current existence. They didn't rule the Death Penalty as such unconstitutional, so your argument in your first post really goes nowhere, Emsworth. (Also, your first example doesn't even deal with the death penalty, and your second one also declares mutilation constitutional.)
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 31, 2005, 09:00:30 am »
Ignore

They struck down the Death Penalty laws in current existence. They didn't rule the Death Penalty as such unconstitutional, so your argument in your first post really goes nowhere, Emsworth. (Also, your first example doesn't even deal with the death penalty, and your second one also declares mutilation constitutional.)
How does the first example fail to deal with the death penalty? It refers to "capital" crimes.

As to the second example, yes, of course mutilation is constitutional.
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 31, 2005, 09:06:49 am »
Ignore

They struck down the Death Penalty laws in current existence. They didn't rule the Death Penalty as such unconstitutional, so your argument in your first post really goes nowhere, Emsworth. (Also, your first example doesn't even deal with the death penalty, and your second one also declares mutilation constitutional.)
How does the first example fail to deal with the death penalty? It refers to "capital" crimes.
Not to punishment.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 31, 2005, 09:08:37 am »
Ignore

Oh, and I don't think amputation of arms, boring through the tongue, etc, were still considered usual at the time. The 18th century was really quite enlightened in judicial practice - though not ancient, unreformed bodies of law - much better than the 19th in many but not all respects.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 31, 2005, 09:12:40 am »
Ignore

Not to punishment.
A capital crime is a crime that can be punished by death. What else could it mean?
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 31, 2005, 09:31:36 am »
Ignore

Not to punishment.
A capital crime is a crime that can be punished by death. What else could it mean?
I've checked, and that indeed is the only meaning it has in English (apart from stupid puns). In German, the definition of Kapitalverbrechen is given as, any major crime, or any crime previously punishable by death ... examples stated being murder, rape, and conspiracy. which is what I started out from. Sorry!
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
Joe Republic
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 30733
United States


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 31, 2005, 10:33:55 am »
Ignore

Wait a second.  How exactly is mutilation constitutional?  That's about as cruel and unusual as you're likely to find.
Logged



Real Americans (and Big Sky Bob) demand to know.


I just slept for 11 hours, so I should need a nap today, but we'll see.
Emsworth
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 9081


Political Matrix
E: 8.32, S: -7.22

View Profile
« Reply #19 on: December 31, 2005, 12:52:34 pm »
Ignore

Wait a second. How exactly is mutilation constitutional? That's about as cruel and unusual as you're likely to find.
The Fifth Amendment's double jeopardy clause explicitly foresees cutting off someone's limbs: "No person shall ... be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb." If one part of the Bill of Rights specifically acknowledges it, then another part of the Bill of Rights does not prohibit it.

Only torturous punishments should be considered "cruel and unusual."
Logged
only back for the worldcup
Lewis Trondheim
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 58778
India


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: January 01, 2006, 09:10:21 am »
Ignore

This of course is assuming that a 1789 member of the constitutional convention was aware of the historical meaning of the phrase. Given that boring through the tongue, amputation of limbs etc had gone out of use in the Americas quite a while before, and the phrase "life and limb" sounds so cool, this may be too large an assumption actually.
Logged

"The secret to having a rewarding work-life balance is to have no life. Then it's easy to keep things balanced by doing no work." Wally



"Our party do not have any ideology... Our main aim is to grab power ... Every one is doing so but I say it openly." Keshav Dev Maurya
AuH2O
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4246


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: January 01, 2006, 04:32:27 pm »
Ignore

One of the worst decisions ever handed down. All concurring justices deserved the death penalty.
Logged

don't forget to remember, the devil's got pills in his eyes

look, laugh, but don't touch... cut you down to size
Redefeatbush04
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1496


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: January 02, 2006, 07:58:04 pm »
Ignore

One of the worst decisions ever handed down. All concurring justices deserved the death penalty.

Another fine example of maturity by AuH20 (rolls eyes)
Logged

Man is by nature a political animal - Aristotle
A18
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 23836
Political Matrix
E: 9.23, S: -6.35

View Profile
« Reply #23 on: January 02, 2006, 07:59:00 pm »
Ignore

Actually, the immaturity was on the part of those justices.
Logged
Redefeatbush04
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1496


View Profile
« Reply #24 on: January 02, 2006, 09:16:57 pm »
Ignore

Actually, the immaturity was on the part of those justices.

Murder is cruel. Using taxpayers money to do it is unusual Tongue
Logged

Man is by nature a political animal - Aristotle
Pages: [1] 2 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines