Legal to Execute Mentally Retarded

¶ … Legal to Execute Mentally Retarded Is it Legal to Execute a Mentally Retarded Person? In June 2002, the United States Supreme Court ruled (6 to 3) that mentally retarded people cannot be executed.

Thirteen years ago, a closely divided Court ruled that executing the retarded was not cruel and unusual punishment because only two states had barred the practice at that time, however at the time of the new ruling, eighteen states had banned the death penalty for the retarded, and that number combined with the twelve states that do not allow the death penalty at all, means that a majority of the states do not execute the retarded (Hansen; Siegel 2002).

Justice John Paul Stevens observed that it is not the number of states, but rather the consistency of the direction of the change. Stevens noted, "a national consensus has developed against the practice...that executing the retarded has become unusual enough to be considered a violation of the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment" (Hansen; Siegel 2002).

Although most mentally retarded people know the difference between right and wrong, "the death penalty has been reserved for the most culpable of criminals, and it cannot be said that a person with the mental age of a child is among the most culpable," moreover, they are at particular risk for being wrongly convicted since they are of little help to their lawyers, are poor witnesses, often confess to crimes they did not commit, and Stevens notes, "their demeanor may create an unwarranted impression of lack of remorse for their crime" (Hansen; Siegel 2002).

Thus, execution of the mentally retarded is not only illegal, but immoral as well. Sue Gunawardena-Vaughn of Amnesty International wants to expand this logic to include the mentally ill, stating, "Severely.