To kill or not to kill? That is the question surrounding the United States Supreme Court as they deliberate the death penalty for a non-homicidal case brought up by the Louisiana Supreme Court, involving Patrick O. Kennedy raping his then-eight-year-old stepdaughter, in 2004.
While this seems contrary to the get-a-taste-of-your-own-medicine attitude, five states, including Louisiana, have permitted the use of capital punishment in cases involving the rape of young children. The last time someone was executed for a crime other than murder was in 1964, which poses the question of whether this possible verdict would violate the Eighth Amendment, which bans cruel and unusual punishment.
While I feel that Kennedy should not be up for capital punishment, in court the judges might beg to differ. We should try to analyze what compels someone to commit a crime like rape and make sure the government is proactive in meeting justice for the victim. While the majority of the judges are conservative — which would make them opt for the death penalty — a few judges may look at the case with an original view of the Constitution.
Antonin Scalia, well known for his strict view of the Constitution, may decide that Kennedy should not be subjected to capital punishment in accordance with the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishment.
There are other factors at work which might make the justices question the use of capital punishment, and that is the use of precedence, or for those so legally inclined, stare decisis. The question of whether we go with what was decided before versus using the current temperature of the American public with regard to hot-button issues, is one that still tears up judicial philosophers today.
If we look at the current mood of Americans, many would gravitate to the idea of capital punishment yet back down at the implementation of it. Bearing this in mind, should the court decide this case in terms of what is socially favorable from a geographic standpoint, or should they keep the opinion of the American masses as a whole in the back of their minds? While this question might not hold much weight with these particular justices, it’s still worth questioning how we view the Constitution and whether it benefits humanity as a whole.