Furman V Georgia Essay

The penalty of finis differs from whole other forms of outlaw punishment, not in degree, but in kind. It is queer in its total irrevocability. It is unique in its rejection of rehabilitation of the convict as a basic excogitation of criminal justice. And it is unique, finally, in its absolute renunciation of all that is embodied in our concept of humanity.For these and other reasons, at least two of my Brothers have reason that the infliction of the death penalty is constitutionally impermissible in all circumstances under the ordinal and Fourteenth Amendments. Their case is a real one. But I find it unnecessary to reach the ultimate top dog they would limit. See Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley Authority, 297 U.S. 288, 347 (Brandeis, J., concurring).The opinions of other Justices today have set off in admirable and thorough detail the origins and legal history of the Eighth Amendments guarantee against the infliction of cruel and unusual punishments, n1 and the origin and ju dicial history of capital punishment. n2 There p307 is thus no want for me to review the historical materials here, and what I have to say can, at that placefore, be briefly countryd. Legislatures state and federal have sometimes specified that the penalty of death shall be the mandatory punishment for every person convicted of engaging in sealed designated criminal conduct. Congress, for example, has provided that eitherone convicted of acting as a spy for the enemy in time of war shall be put to death. n3 The Rhode Island Legislature has ordained the death penalty for a life term prisoner who commits murder. n4 Massachusetts has passed a law imposing the death penalty upon anyone convicted of murder in the representation of a forcible rape. n5 An Ohio law imposes the mandatory penalty of death upon the bravo of the President of the United States or the Governor of a State. n6If we were reviewing death sentences compel under these or similar laws, we would be faced with t he need to decide whether capital punishment is unconstitutional for all crimes and under all circumstances. We would need to decide whether a legislature state or federal could constitutionally determine that certain criminal conduct is so atrociousthat confederacys interest in deterrence and avenging wholly outweighs any considerations of reform or rehabilitation of the perpetrator, and that, despite the inconclusive empirical evidence, n7 sole(prenominal) p308 the automatic penalty of death will provide maximum deterrence.On that score I would say only that I cannot agree that retribution is a constitutionally impermissible ingredient in the imposition of punishment. The mind for retribution is part of the nature of man, and channeling that instinct in the administration of criminal justice serves an important purpose in promoting the stability of a community governed by law. When people begin to believe that organized society is indisposed or unable to impose upon crimin al offenders the punishment they deserve, then there are sown the seeds of anarchy of self-help, vigilante justice, and lynch law.