The death penalty has constantly been a controversial punishment, executed by the American federal, state, and local governments, whose constitutionality and morality has been questioned, researched, and debated by Americans from all walks of life - congressional leaders, Supreme Court Justices, legal scholars, media reporters, students, and everyday people. In regards to the death penalty, many question whether or not it is a truly useful punishment for capital offenses, challenging whether or not the punishment deters people from committing capital offenses. While support the death penalty and cite that it does defer crimes (Jones 1), some people, like Law and Public Health Professor Jeffrey Fagan of Columbia University, argue that the death
…show more content…
The federal government list 41 capital offenses that can result in the sentence of death. Capital offenses includes the crimes of genocide, espionage, treason, but mostly consists of murders of various forms, ranging from murder for hire to the murder of a member of Congress (see table 3). Naturally, there has been controversy concerning the death penalty. The controversy questions two factors: whether or not the death penalty is considered a “cruel and unusual punishment”, and whether or not it is permissible for the federal government to consider the punishment of death a proportional sentence to crimes. In context to the death penalty, the concept of “cruel and unusual punishment” is found in the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution which states, “cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be required or] inflicted (Constitution of the U.S., Archives),” which inherently protects Americans from cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Amendment fails to define what consists as cruel and unusual punishment, leaving the Supreme Court with the duty of defining and interpreting the clause, also permitting them to determine whether or not the application of the death penalty is, in fact constitutional. The Supreme Court began to illuminate the ambiguity of the “cruel and unusual …show more content…
Helms (1983), which strived to apply a test to determine whether or not a punishment was proportional to its crime, especially in regards to death penalty jurisprudence, and by addressing the purpose behind the death penalty in Gregg v. Georgia (428 U.S. 153 1976), to determine whether or not it was inherently cruel and unusual. Explicitly in Gregg v. Georgia, Justice Stewart remarks in his majority opinion that the death penalty “serve[s] two principal social purposes: retribution and deterrence (Gregg v. Georgia 1976).” Despite this, however, the debate on the death penalty and deterrence has been carried out for decades. The
The federal government list 41 capital offenses that can result in the sentence of death. Capital offenses includes the crimes of genocide, espionage, treason, but mostly consists of murders of various forms, ranging from murder for hire to the murder of a member of Congress (see table 3). Naturally, there has been controversy concerning the death penalty. The controversy questions two factors: whether or not the death penalty is considered a “cruel and unusual punishment”, and whether or not it is permissible for the federal government to consider the punishment of death a proportional sentence to crimes. In context to the death penalty, the concept of “cruel and unusual punishment” is found in the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution which states, “cruel and unusual punishments [shall not be required or] inflicted (Constitution of the U.S., Archives),” which inherently protects Americans from cruel and unusual punishment. However, the Amendment fails to define what consists as cruel and unusual punishment, leaving the Supreme Court with the duty of defining and interpreting the clause, also permitting them to determine whether or not the application of the death penalty is, in fact constitutional. The Supreme Court began to illuminate the ambiguity of the “cruel and unusual …show more content…
Helms (1983), which strived to apply a test to determine whether or not a punishment was proportional to its crime, especially in regards to death penalty jurisprudence, and by addressing the purpose behind the death penalty in Gregg v. Georgia (428 U.S. 153 1976), to determine whether or not it was inherently cruel and unusual. Explicitly in Gregg v. Georgia, Justice Stewart remarks in his majority opinion that the death penalty “serve[s] two principal social purposes: retribution and deterrence (Gregg v. Georgia 1976).” Despite this, however, the debate on the death penalty and deterrence has been carried out for decades. The