The U.S. Constitution’s clause regarding “cruel and unusual punishment” is the most essential and contentious part of the Eighth Amendment. What does it mean for a punishment of a crime to be “cruel and unusual”? How does one evaluate a punishment’s cruelty? The Eighth Amendment, ratified in 1791, includes only sixteen words: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted” (Eighth Amendment). That amendment, nevertheless has created vast controversy, generating thousands of court cases and reactions to U.S. Supreme Court decisions. The U.S. Supreme Court has struggled over the years to figure out a conclusive answer to what constitutes as “cruel and unusual” punishment. There
…show more content…
In 1776, George Mason continued the restriction on “cruel and unusual punishment” by including it in the Declaration of Rights for the Commonwealth of Virginia (National Constitution Center). When the United States Constitution was ratified in 1788, it was suggested by the Virginia Convention that similar language be integrated into the U.S. Constitution. It was intended that the restriction for “cruel and unusual punishment” also bind Congress, since otherwise, it could merely impose cruel punishments rather than them being perpetrated by the court. In 1791, the U.S. Constitution followed the Virginia Convention’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment”, thereby creating one of the main elements of the Eighth Amendment. (National Constitution Center).
The principal concern of the drafters of the Constitution was to exclude torture and further barbaric ways of punishment. Given the age at the time the Eighth Amendment was drafted and ratified, one of its clear goals was to bar torture. Under the restrictions levied by the Constitution, penalties for crimes could include fines or incarceration, but not unreasonably painful or physically hurtful consequences such as branding or whipping, which were both common practices in the 1700’s. The Court asserted that punishments of torture, and all similar actions of unnecessary cruelty, …show more content…
The United States. In this case, Paula Weems, who was an officer of the Bureau of Coast Guard and Transportation of the United States Government was convicted of exaggerating official records, which led to the cheating of the government of 606 pesos (approximately $33.50 of U.S. currency) (Weems v. US). The punishment that was inflicted upon Weems included fifteen (15) years of tough labor in prison, constantly being chained up, the forfeiture of all political rights while in prison, perpetual surveillance after release, and a fine of 4,000 pesetas (which would now be Euros, as pesetas were replaced by Euros in 1999, and equivalent to $4,231 of U.S. currency) (Weems v. US). Weems appealed his case to the Supreme Court stating that the punishment breached his constitutional right from “cruel and unusual punishment”. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the punishment inflicted on Weems was indeed unconstitutional (Weems v. US). While there were some differences of opinion between the justices as to why it would be considered unconstitutional, Justice McKenna, for example, perceived the Eighth Amendment noting that “...it is a precept of justice that punishment for a crime should be graduated and proportioned to that offense” (Weems v. US) and that the punishment was “cruel in its
In 1776, George Mason continued the restriction on “cruel and unusual punishment” by including it in the Declaration of Rights for the Commonwealth of Virginia (National Constitution Center). When the United States Constitution was ratified in 1788, it was suggested by the Virginia Convention that similar language be integrated into the U.S. Constitution. It was intended that the restriction for “cruel and unusual punishment” also bind Congress, since otherwise, it could merely impose cruel punishments rather than them being perpetrated by the court. In 1791, the U.S. Constitution followed the Virginia Convention’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishment”, thereby creating one of the main elements of the Eighth Amendment. (National Constitution Center).
The principal concern of the drafters of the Constitution was to exclude torture and further barbaric ways of punishment. Given the age at the time the Eighth Amendment was drafted and ratified, one of its clear goals was to bar torture. Under the restrictions levied by the Constitution, penalties for crimes could include fines or incarceration, but not unreasonably painful or physically hurtful consequences such as branding or whipping, which were both common practices in the 1700’s. The Court asserted that punishments of torture, and all similar actions of unnecessary cruelty, …show more content…
The United States. In this case, Paula Weems, who was an officer of the Bureau of Coast Guard and Transportation of the United States Government was convicted of exaggerating official records, which led to the cheating of the government of 606 pesos (approximately $33.50 of U.S. currency) (Weems v. US). The punishment that was inflicted upon Weems included fifteen (15) years of tough labor in prison, constantly being chained up, the forfeiture of all political rights while in prison, perpetual surveillance after release, and a fine of 4,000 pesetas (which would now be Euros, as pesetas were replaced by Euros in 1999, and equivalent to $4,231 of U.S. currency) (Weems v. US). Weems appealed his case to the Supreme Court stating that the punishment breached his constitutional right from “cruel and unusual punishment”. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the punishment inflicted on Weems was indeed unconstitutional (Weems v. US). While there were some differences of opinion between the justices as to why it would be considered unconstitutional, Justice McKenna, for example, perceived the Eighth Amendment noting that “...it is a precept of justice that punishment for a crime should be graduated and proportioned to that offense” (Weems v. US) and that the punishment was “cruel in its