The Eighth Amendment: An Analysis of Cruel and Unusual Punishments

This essay provides a comprehensive analysis of the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution, focusing on the prohibition of excessive bail, excessive fines, and cruel and unusual punishments. It begins with an introduction to the amendment, its origins in the English Bill of Rights, and its evolution through landmark Supreme Court cases such as Trop v. Dulles (1958). The essay explores the concept of cruel and unusual punishments, including capital punishment, and examines the principles established in Furman v. Georgia (1972) for determining such punishments. It also discusses punishments deemed wholly prohibited, such as drawing and quartering, and those prohibited for certain crimes, such as the death penalty for juveniles and the mentally challenged, citing cases like Wilkerson v. Utah (1878), Thompson v. Oklahoma (1998), and Atkins v. Virginia (2002). The essay further analyzes death penalty challenges and permitted punishments, referencing cases like Coker v. Georgia (1977) and Harmelin v. Michigan (1991), and concludes by highlighting the amendment's evolving interpretation based on societal standards and the debates surrounding it. The essay includes a detailed list of references to support the arguments presented.

EIGHT AMENDMENT
The Eight Amendment of the US Constitution being a part of the Bill of Rights
deals exclusively with the punishments and penalties stating that excessive bail,
excessive fines and cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted.

INTRODUCTION
 The Amendment deals with prohibition of excessive bail, excessive fines and the
punishments of cruel and unusual nature inflicted upon the criminal defendants.
 The amendment was adopted on the 15th Day of December 1791 along with the adoption of
the United States Bill of Rights.
 The phrases used in the amendment has been originated from the English Bill of Rights
1689.
 In Trop vs. Dulles (1958) 356 US 86, it was held that the Eighth Amendment has
originated from the establishment of the decency standards evolving from the society being
maturing.

CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS:
 The punishments like drawing, quartering, and capital punishments are the considerations
which have been reconsidered due to the adoption of the Eighth Amendment.
 The Supreme Court laid down that although the application of capital punishment is
prohibited due to Eighth Amendment.
 However, it can still be permitted for rare of the rarest cases where the defendant is held
guilty of murder of the heinous nature.
 The amendment for cruel and unusual punishments applies to states as well as the federal
government.

RULINGS:
 In Lousiana ex rel. Francis vs. Resweber (1947) 329 US 459, it was
assumed by the Supreme Court that arguendo for the application of
Cruel and Unusual Punishments shall be applicable to states by the
virtue of Fourteenth Amendment.
 In Robinson vs. California (1962) 370 US 660, it was held by the Court
that the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments shall be
applicable to the states by the virtue of Fourteenth Amendment.

PRINCIPLES FOR CRUEL AND
UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS:
In Furman vs. Georgia (1972) 408 US 238, it was held that there are four
principles for the determination of punishment to be cruel and of unusual
nature:
 The punishment must not be such that it’s severity would result in the
degradation of human dignity.
 The severity of the punishment should not be such that it is inflicted in the
arbitrary nature as a whole of its context.
 The severity of the punishment should not be such that it is rejected by the
entire society.
 The punishment should be necessary for the crime committed. If the
punishment is patently unnecessary then such punishment shall be of
cruel and unusual nature.

PUNISHMENT WHICH ARE WHOLLY
PROHIBITED:
 In Wilkerson vs. Utah (1878) 99 US 130, it was held by the Supreme Court that the
punishment like drawing, quartering, public dissection, burning alive, or
disembowelment shall amount to cruel and unusual punishment and shall be
prohibited by the Amendment.
 In Thompson vs. Oklahoma (1998) 487 US 815, it was held by the Court that death
penalty would be assumed to be a cruel and an unusual punishment, if such
defendant to whom the punishment is inflicted, is below the age of 16 at the time of
the commission of the crime.
 In Roper vs. Simmons (2005) 543 US 551, it was held by the Court that the defendants
executed under the age of 18 shall be deemed to be cruelly and unusually punished.
 In Atkins vs. Virginia (2002) 536 US 304, it was held by the Court that the defendants
who are mentally challenged shall not be executed. If they are executed, then they
shall be deemed to have been cruelly and unusually punished.

PUNISHMENT WHICH ARE
PROHIBITED FOR CERTAIN CRIMES:
 In Weems vs. United States (1910) 217 US 349, the court had for the
first time overturned a punishment called cadena temporal which means
hard labor of mandate nature which is established under the rule of
proportionality under the Eighth Amendment.
 In Trop vs. Dulles (1958) 356 US 86, it was held by the Supreme Court
that the citizenship of a naturally born citizen shall not be revoked.
 In Robinson vs. California (1962) 370 US 660, it was decided by the
Court that the imprisonment for the addiction of narcotics is the
violation of Eighth Amendment.
 In Powell vs. Texas (1968) 392 US 514, it was held by the Court that
public intoxication cannot be banned by the statute and if it does, such
statute shall be unconstitutional in nature. (!)

DEATH PENALTY:
 In Coker vs. Georgia (1977) 433 US 584, it was held by the Court that
the death penalty cannot be invoked for raping an adult woman.
 Further, in Kennedy vs. Lousiana (2008) 554 US 407, it was extended by
the court that death penalty may be invoked for raping a child where
the child has not died due to rape.
 This is so because the Eighth Amendment does not completely prohibits
the capital punishment but only invokes proportionality on the basis of
the nature of the crime committed.

CHALLENGES TO CAPITAL
PUNISHMENT:
 In Furman vs. Georgia (1972) 408 US 238, it was held that capital
punishment is not per se unconstitutional and shall be applied only
depending upon the severity of the crime and its consequences.
 In Gregg vs. Georgia (1976) 428 US 153, it was held by the Court that
executions shall be resumed and the same was resumed in 1977.
 The laws mandating the death penalties were found to be
unconstitutional in Woodson vs. North Carolina (1976) 428 US 280. (!)
 However, in Godfrey vs. Georgia (1980) 446 US 420, it was held that it is
important for the court to specify the reasons influencing their decision
forming the ratio decidendi and obiter dicta of any case. (*)

PERMITTED PUNISHMENTS:
 In Wilkerson vs. Utah (1878) 99 US 130, it was held that the death by
the action of firing squad shall not be held unconstitutional.
 In Rummel vs. Estelle (1980) 445 US 263, it was held by the Court that
the life sentence with parole fee shall be held constitutional.
 In Harmelin vs. Michigan (1991) 501 US 957, it was held by the court
that life imprisonment without the allowance for parole for the accused
being arrested for the possession of 672 gms of cocaine would be
constitutional.
 In Lockyer vs. Andrade (2003) 538 US 63, it was held by the Court that
50 years and a maximum of life imprisonment with parole possibility
would be constitutional for the accused being found guilty for shoplifting
videotapes woth 150$.

CONCLUSION:
 It can be concluded that the Eighth Amendment is based on the
meaning of standard of decency which establishes the society has been
progressing.
 Justice Antonin Scalia and other originalists have argued that societies
may decline instead of maturing due to the pulse of changing standards
of decency.
 The tests of evolving standards have not been established by the critics
and is solely based on the discretion and understanding of the court.

REFERENCES:
 Trop vs. Dulles (1958) 356 US 86
 Lousiana ex rel. Francis vs. Resweber (1947) 329 US 459
 Robinson vs. California (1962) 370 US 660
 Furman vs. Georgia (1972) 408 US 238
 Wilkerson vs. Utah (1878) 99 US 130
 Thompson vs. Oklahoma (1998) 487 US 815
 Roper vs. Simmons (2005) 543 US 551
 Atkins vs. Virginia (2002) 536 US 304
 Weems vs. United States (1910) 217 US 349
 Trop vs. Dulles (1958) 356 US 86