breaking the legal barrier

Prior to Stanford v. Kentucky, a major disparity existed between legislations among individual states with regards to the juvenile death penalty. The 1989 decision was the first time that the Supreme Court took a stance in favor of the constitutionality of the death penalty for individuals who were offenders at the age of 16. Sixteen years later, this decision was reversed by Roper v. Simmons, establishing standard of greater leniency in sentencing in the juvenile justice system. Consequently, these verdicts overcame the previously existing political barrier of inconsistent legislation among individual states.

Stanford v. Kentucky, 1989

"Taking the life of someone for a crime he or she committed when they were under 18 is cruel and unusual punishment. Justice O’Connor is correct that the Court must go beyond the plurality’s assessment of the state of the law in the various states. Reviewing all age-based statutes and a proportionality analysis are required to truly judge the constitutionality of a death sentence."

- Justice William Brennan Jr., Dissent of the Court

"No national consensus forbids executing 16 and 17 year olds. However, the Court has the obligation to conduct a proportionality analysis, and should consider age-based statutory classifications that are relevant to the analysis."

- Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, Concurrence of the Court

Roper v. Simmons, 2005

“The differences between juvenile and adult offenders are too marked and well understood to risk allowing a youthful person to receive the death penalty despite insufficient culpability,”

- Justice Anthony Kennedy, Opinion of the Court

“When a juvenile offender commits a heinous crime, the state can exact forfeiture of some of the most basic liberties, but the state cannot extinguish his life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity.”

- Justice Anthony Kennedy, Opinion of the Court

Brennan, William Joseph Jr., in Biographical Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court 57 (Melvin I. Urofsky ed., 2006), http://library.cqpress.com/scc/bioenc-427-18975-1014156.

O'Connor, Sandra Day, in Biographical Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court 381 (Melvin I. Urofsky ed., 2006), http://library.cqpress.com/scc/bioenc-427-18168-979440.

Kennedy, Anthony McLeod, in Biographical Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court 307 (Melvin I. Urofsky ed., 2006), http://library.cqpress.com/scc/bioenc-427-18167-979331.

The Liberal Perspective

The Conservative Perspective

"Calls for the abolition of the death penalty, which it describes as “a cruel and unusual form of punishment” that “has no place” in the nation."

"Decries the 'over-federalization of criminal justice,' says the constitutionality of the death penalty is 'firmly settled,' and condemns the U.S. Supreme Court for what it calls the 'erosion of the right of the people to enact capital punishment.'"

-Death Penalty Information Center,“Political Party Platforms and the Death Penalty.”

"As of February 28, 2005, the day before Roper v. Simmons was decided, 71 persons were on death row for juvenile crimes. These 71 condemned juvenile offenders constituted about 2% of the total death row population of 3,471. Although all were ages 16 or 17 at the time of their crimes, their ages range from 18 to 43 when Roper was decided. They were under death sentences in 12 different states and had been on death row from 6 months to 24 years. Texas had by far the largest death row for juvenile offenders, holding 29 (41%) of the national total of 71 juvenile offenders."

- Death Penalty Information Center, “The Juvenile Death Penalty Prior to Roper v. Simmons.”

BREAKING THE LEGAL BARRIER

Stanford v. Kentucky, 1989

Roper v. Simmons, 2005

JUSTICE KENNEDY "SWINGS LEFT" ON DEATH PENALTY