The US Supreme Court ushered in a new term yesterday morning with a bevy of polarizing social issues: the death penalty, affirmative action, and contraception.
The Court’s docket this year is already furnished with two cases of particular significance regarding capital punishment. The Court will answer this question: is a jury the correct body for recommending capital punishment?
In the case of the Hurst v. Florida, the legal issue the Court must settle is whether Florida’s death sentencing scheme, which allows juries to recommend capital punishment by simple majority vote, is constitutional or not.
Unfettered Discretion Can Be Fixed With Procedural Safeguards
Beyond the jury question, the Court will also decide whether the death penalty is even constitutional. It has previously been well settled by the Court that the death penalty is generally permissible and does not violate the Eighth Amendment prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.
Breyer Looms Over
Justice Breyer has famously made clear his current opinion that the death penalty is unconstitutional. He noted a number of different and innumerable factors that led him to his conclusion and detailed them all in a lengthy 40+ page dissent, arguably drowning out the majority voice in Glossip v. Gross (2015).
Related Resources:
- In a Brave, Powerful Dissent, Justice Breyer Calls for the Abolition of the Death Penalty (Slate.com)
- Court Upholds Lethal Injection Cocktail, Breyer Strongly Dissents (FindLaw SCOTUS)
- SCOTUS Agrees to Hear Lethal Injection Case (FindLaw SCOTUS)
You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help
Civil Rights
Block on Trump’s Asylum Ban Upheld by Supreme Court
Criminal
Judges Can Release Secret Grand Jury Records
Politicians Can’t Block Voters on Facebook, Court Rules
