Troy Gregg was questioning the constitutionality of the death penalty, which was burdened upon him for his role in a burglary/murder case earlier this year. The courts decided that the death penalty did not violate any constitutional rights from the 8th or 14th amendments of the constitution which state the “cruel and unusual punishment” laws of the US.
The courts decision was written by the majority leader Stewert who spoke for himself, Mr. Justice Powell, and Mr. Justice Stevens. They concluded that the death penalty did not constitute cruel and unusual punishment. They also said that in the Furman case, the defendant did not commit a crime of the same magnitude, and therefore, the death penalty was was cruel and unusual. Another statement they made was that the death penalty was given to him on a reasonable stature, and not based on prejudice. The courts did an extensive evidence check, and they too agreed that the death penalty is right for his actions.
White, Burger, and Rehnquist made concurring decisions. Blackmun also concurred, but only because he made the same decision in the Furman case just a little before hand. Whites decision was made upon many opinions. One being that the new Georgia Statitory Scheme would
On The other hand, White, Burger and Rehnquist concurred the statements that Stewert said. They agreed that the death penalty that was burdened upon people accused of murder could be carried out because of the wording of the new laws of Georgia. These laws gave the courts the power to decide whether or not to impose the death penalty, and they could do that at their own discression. Blackmun, on the other hand, concurred his decision based upon his former decision in the Furman case.Brennen and Marshall both dissented the decisions, and were the only two to do so.
Brennen and Marshall both dissented the decisions, and were the only two to do so. They felt that the death penalty is getting old. They feel that was relevant when the constitution was written, but nowadays, it is “immature.” They also felt that it serves no purpose now. Back in the day, the death penalty was the ultimate event. People would come from all over to see an execution. But now, it serves the mere purpose of what seems to be clearing prison cells for future inmates. Personally, I like the decision, and I agree totally with Stewerts decision. I think it is just for people to get what they deserve, and to be put to death for their severe penalties.
My name is Josh, and I believe in the death penalty. I like the way that the Supreme Court ruled their case, and I think that it is not even close to violating peoples rights. In fact, he violated his right as a citizen to murder, and rob people who were just trying to help him. When people violate their rights like that, they deserve to be put off the streets and into cells and electric chairs. I also disagree with the people who think that this was a racist decision. Think again. Even if this person was white, they would still reinstate the death penalty. We know, and the US knows that we cannot have these people on the streets, and they must tell people to be afraid for what can happen when the break the law...
Thank you for your time,
Mitchell, Hayley R. The Death Penalty. San Diego: Greenhouse Press, inc., 2001
Banner, Stuart. The Death Penalty: An American History. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2002
“Death Penalty.” Oxford Guide to United States Supreme Court Decisions. Vol. 1, 2001.