Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
3 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
POL 303 Week 4 DQ 2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment
|
POL 303 Week 4 DQ 2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment Cruel and Unusual Punishment. During the last decade, the Supreme Court has applied the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments against some of the harsher sentencing policies implemented by various states. Three cases dealing with juvenile offenders – Roper v. Simmons (2005), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama (2012) – illustrate this moderating trend. An underlying rationale of these decisions – “disproportionality” – contrasts with rationales guiding the Court’s earlier (pre- 2002) interpretations of the 8th Amendment (see Davis, 2008). Respond to this 3-part question in your initial post: Explain the rationale which seems to guide the current Supreme Court majority’s approach to defining “cruel and unusual punishment.” Contrast this approach with an important rationale that seems to guide the pre-2002 Court. Evaluate both of these approaches. Explain and justify your evaluation by drawing on persuasive evidence apart from your own personal opinion (e.g., research findings from sociology or criminal justice).
|
|
|
POL 303 Week 4 DQ 2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment
http://www.fres-courses.com/product/pol-303-week-4-dq-2-cruel-and-unusual-punishment |
POL 303 Week 4 DQ 2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment Cruel and Unusual Punishment. During the last decade, the Supreme Court has applied the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments against some of the harsher sentencing policies implemented by various states. Three cases dealing with juvenile offenders – Roper v. Simmons (2005), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama (2012) – illustrate this moderating trend. An underlying rationale of these decisions – “disproportionality” – contrasts with rationales guiding the Court’s earlier (pre- 2002) interpretations of the 8th Amendment (see Davis, 2008). Respond to this 3-part question in your initial post: Explain the rationale which seems to guide the current Supreme Court majority’s approach to defining “cruel and unusual punishment.” Contrast this approach with an important rationale that seems to guide the pre-2002 Court. Evaluate both of these approaches. Explain and justify your evaluation by drawing on persuasive evidence apart from your own personal opinion (e.g., research findings from sociology or criminal justice).
|
|
|
POL 303 Week 4 DQ 2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment
http://www.fres-courses.com/product/pol-303-week-4-dq-2-cruel-and-unusual-punishment |
POL 303 Week 4 DQ 2 Cruel and Unusual Punishment Cruel and Unusual Punishment. During the last decade, the Supreme Court has applied the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments against some of the harsher sentencing policies implemented by various states. Three cases dealing with juvenile offenders – Roper v. Simmons (2005), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama (2012) – illustrate this moderating trend. An underlying rationale of these decisions – “disproportionality” – contrasts with rationales guiding the Court’s earlier (pre- 2002) interpretations of the 8th Amendment (see Davis, 2008). Respond to this 3-part question in your initial post: Explain the rationale which seems to guide the current Supreme Court majority’s approach to defining “cruel and unusual punishment.” Contrast this approach with an important rationale that seems to guide the pre-2002 Court. Evaluate both of these approaches. Explain and justify your evaluation by drawing on persuasive evidence apart from your own personal opinion (e.g., research findings from sociology or criminal justice).
|
