Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
While the decision has hung over states as one national standard, it infringes the essential principles of federalism and separation of powers that are rooted in the country's constitutional system (Silversten, 2011).
During the time that the Supreme Court made this ruling, the state of Georgia basically had the same position on punishment for the crime of rape with many states. Actually, very few states permitted the executions or enforcement of capital punishment for convicted rapists. Similar to many of the states, Georgia did not permit the execution of individuals convicted of rape mainly because of the constitutional requirement of proportionality. However, the Supreme Court made its ruling and conclusion through considering the objective indicia of the country's attitude toward capital punishment in rape cases. Nonetheless, this cannot be justified under the Constitution because the Supreme Court could have simply left the decision in place and restricted itself to analyzing the concerns and questions that were unexplored (Colb, 2003).
In making its ruling, the Supreme Court reversed the decision by Georgia's lower courts to give Coker the death penalty. As previously mentioned, the Supreme Court reversed the decision by Georgia's lower courts because it was considering the attitude of the nation toward death...
While the reason for the Supreme Court's decision is justified, the ruling has attracted huge debates and concerns in favor and against the decision.
Based on the constitutional requirement of proportionally, I don't agree with the Supreme Court's decision since it's arbitrary. This decision results in the treatment of child rape as qualitatively more heinous than that of an adult woman for the purposes of capital punishment (Adam, 2008). One of the major concerns about the decision is that it specifically considers the rape of adult women but does not effectively address the rape of adults in general.
Conclusion:
In order to prevent subjective enforcement of the death penalty, there are certain constitutional requirements for an offender to receive this punishment. The major constitutional requirement that is used to determine cases involving the death penalty is proportionality.
References:
Adam, B. (2008, June 25). SCOTUS: Execution of Child Rapists Cruel, Unusual,
Unconstitutional. Retrieved July 29, 2012, from http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/06/25/541659/-SCOTUS-Execution-of-Child-Rapists-Cruel-Unusual-Unconst-l
Berman, D.A. & Bibas, S. (2008). Engaging Capital Emotions. Retrieved from Northwestern
University Law website: http://www.law.northwestern.edu/lawreview/colloquy/2008/17/
29, 2012, from http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/09/12/findlaw.analysis.colb.rapists/index.html
"Death Penalty: An Overview." (2010, August 19). Legal Information Institute. Retrieved from Cornell University Law School website: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/death_penalty
Statutes Provide the Supreme Court an Opportunity to Return Meaning to the Eighth Amendment. Gonzaga Law Review, 37(1), 121-166. Retrieved from http://blogs.gonzaga.edu/gulawreview/files/2011/01/Silversten.pdf
"Types of Sentences." (n.d.). Cliff Notes. Retrieved July 29, 2012, from http://www.cliffsnotes.com/study_guide/Types-of-Sentences.topicArticleId-10065,articleId-10040.html
Supreme Court Case Supreme Court Decision in Re Waterman, 910 2D (N.H. 2006) The Case The case addressed in this section of the report is that of Supreme Court case In Re Waterman, 910 A.2d 1175 (N.H. 2006). In this case, Tracy Waterman, working as a trooper for the New Hampshire State Policy was informed on August 29, 3003 that Vicky Lemere, the wife of one of Waterman's fellow troopers, informed Lieutenant Nedeau,
Supreme Court cases (Muller V. Oregon) women's right Why it was an issue of national importance The Muller v. Oregon case was among the most crucial Supreme Court cases in the U.S. during the progressive regime. The case held an Oregon law that limited the working days for female wage employees to a maximum of ten hours. In 1908, this case created a precedent to expand access of national activities into the
D. joined the Majority. Justices Blackmun, H.A. And Powell, L.F. wrote a special and regular concurrence respectively. In addition to voting with the majority, O'Connor S.D. joined Powel's concurrence. Writing Dissenting Opinion(s): Stevens, J.P. filed a dissenting opinion in which Marshall, T. And Brennan, W.J joined. Brennan also filed a separate dissenting opinion in which Marshall T. joined. Case 5 Citation: Santa Fe Independent School District v. Jane Doe (2000) Argued: March 29, 2000 Date
Marbury v. Madison Supreme Court Case Study Every year Supreme Court provides decision in cases that really impact the American citizen's rights. The aim of this analysis is to keenly check cases handled by the Supreme Court and the way they were given their final verdict. The parties involved sometimes get that the cases favor them or not depending on the existing laws or even through undermining the constitution. The case in
Supreme Court of the United States is commonly held to be the last bastion of getting a legal standard correct and complete. While legal precedents shift and change over time, the court eventually "gets it right" or at least comes to a settled position. However, there are other times where the court clearly gets it wrong and technically ensconces something that is wrong-minded and ill-conceived. Although Plessy v. Ferguson
Supreme Court opinions and dissents are essentially reflections of judicial self-restraint or judicial activism. Generally, the Supreme Court reflects judicial self-restraint or judicial activism through the use of the doctrine of standing in majority opinions and in dissenting opinions respectively. This implies that judicial self-restraint and judicial activism are terms in current legal language that describe opposite approaches that are taken by judges to interpret various issues relating to a