SCOTUS rocks!
Today the Supreme Court of the United States abolished the death penalty for juveniles.
Well, it's about damn time.
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states. The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of 72 juvenile murderers and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes.
The executions, the court said, violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The ruling continues the court’s practice of narrowing the scope of the death penalty, which justices reinstated in 1976. The court in 1988 outlawed executions for those 15 and younger when they committed their crimes. Three years ago justices banned executions of the mentally retarded. Tuesday’s ruling prevents states from making 16- and 17-year-olds eligible for execution.
“The age of 18 is the point where society draws the line for many purposes between childhood and adulthood. It is, we conclude, the age at which the line for death eligibility ought to rest,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. Juvenile offenders have been put to death in recent years in only a few other countries, including Iran, Pakistan, China and Saudi Arabia. Kennedy cited international opposition to the practice. “It is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty, resting in large part on the understanding that the instability and emotional imbalance of young people may often be a factor in the crime,” he wrote.
What's interesting is that Kennedy joined the liberal justices in order to swing the vote here. Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas voted to uphold the executions, of course. Justice O'Connor joined them. Justice Scalia issued a 24-page dissent, chastising the majority for taking power away from the states and "being the sole arbiter of our nation's moral standards." Justice O'Connor's dissent argued against a blanket rule banning juvenile executions.
I understand the importance of maintaining the states' rights to impose their laws. I understand the dangers of wide-sweeping blanket rules without exception. I do not, however, understand any justification for sentencing a teenager to death, even for the most heinous of crimes.
We are supposed to be a civilized nation, one that leads by example, and I am so glad the Court recognized that today with this important decision.
Well, it's about damn time.
The Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that the Constitution forbids the execution of killers who were under 18 when they committed their crimes, ending a practice used in 19 states. The 5-4 decision throws out the death sentences of 72 juvenile murderers and bars states from seeking to execute minors for future crimes.
The executions, the court said, violate the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The ruling continues the court’s practice of narrowing the scope of the death penalty, which justices reinstated in 1976. The court in 1988 outlawed executions for those 15 and younger when they committed their crimes. Three years ago justices banned executions of the mentally retarded. Tuesday’s ruling prevents states from making 16- and 17-year-olds eligible for execution.
“The age of 18 is the point where society draws the line for many purposes between childhood and adulthood. It is, we conclude, the age at which the line for death eligibility ought to rest,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote. Juvenile offenders have been put to death in recent years in only a few other countries, including Iran, Pakistan, China and Saudi Arabia. Kennedy cited international opposition to the practice. “It is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty, resting in large part on the understanding that the instability and emotional imbalance of young people may often be a factor in the crime,” he wrote.
What's interesting is that Kennedy joined the liberal justices in order to swing the vote here. Justices Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas voted to uphold the executions, of course. Justice O'Connor joined them. Justice Scalia issued a 24-page dissent, chastising the majority for taking power away from the states and "being the sole arbiter of our nation's moral standards." Justice O'Connor's dissent argued against a blanket rule banning juvenile executions.
I understand the importance of maintaining the states' rights to impose their laws. I understand the dangers of wide-sweeping blanket rules without exception. I do not, however, understand any justification for sentencing a teenager to death, even for the most heinous of crimes.
We are supposed to be a civilized nation, one that leads by example, and I am so glad the Court recognized that today with this important decision.
posted by Amanda at 3:51 PM
<< Home