Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution

1018: (1998), the Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to confiscate $ 357,144 from Hosep Bajakajian, who had failed to report possession of over $ 10,000 while leaving the United States. In what was the first case in which the Supreme Court ruled that a fine violated the Excessive Fines Clause, the Court held that it was "grossly disproportional" to take all the money Bajakajian had attempted to take out of the United States in violation of a federal law that required that he report an amount in excess of $ 10,000. In describing what constituted "gross disproportionality", the Court could not find any guidance from the history of the Excessive Fines Clause, and so relied on Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause case law: 903:, and this Court cannot interfere with state legislation in fixing fines, or judicial action in imposing them, unless so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law. Where a state antitrust law fixed penalties at $ 5,000 a day, and, after the verdict is guilty for over 300 days, a defendant corporation was fined over $ 1,600,000, this Court will not hold that the fine is so excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law where it appears that the business was extensive and profitable during the period of violation and that the corporation has over $ 40,000,000 of assets and has declared dividends amounting to several hundred percent 1684: (1983), that the Supreme Court held that incarceration, standing alone, could constitute cruel and unusual punishment if it were "disproportionate" in duration to the offense. The Court outlined three factors that were to be considered in determining if a sentence is excessive: "(i) the gravity of the offense and the harshness of the penalty; (ii) the sentences imposed on other criminals in the same jurisdiction; and (iii) the sentences imposed for commission of the same crime in other jurisdictions." The Court held that in the circumstances of the case before it and the factors to consider, a sentence of 488: 55: 2212:

capital punishment. Nor did the later addition of the Eighth Amendment outlaw the practice. Of course, that doesn't mean the American people must continue to use the death penalty. The same Constitution that permits States to authorize capital punishment also allows them to outlaw it. But it does mean that the judiciary bears no license to end a debate reserved for the people and their representatives. While the Eighth Amendment doesn’t forbid capital punishment, it does speak to how States may carry out that punishment, prohibiting methods that are 'cruel and unusual'."

1725:, said "the Eighth Amendment contains no proportionality guarantee," and that "what was 'cruel and unusual' under the Eighth Amendment was to be determined without reference to the particular offense." Scalia wrote "If 'cruel and unusual punishments' included disproportionate punishments, the separate prohibition of disproportionate fines (which are certainly punishments) would have been entirely superfluous." Moreover, "There is little doubt that those who framed, proposed, and ratified the Bill of Rights were aware of such provisions , yet chose not to replicate them." 1288:

conclusion that a punishment is 'cruel and unusual'. The test, then, will ordinarily be a cumulative one: if a punishment is unusually severe, if there is a strong probability that it is inflicted arbitrarily, if it is substantially rejected by contemporary society, and if there is no reason to believe that it serves any penal purpose more effectively than some less severe punishment, then the continued infliction of that punishment violates the command of the Clause that the State may not inflict inhuman and uncivilized punishments upon those convicted of crimes."

2573:, at 449. In passing over that question, however, we observed that “unishments are cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death; but the punishment of death is not cruel within the meaning of that word as used in the Constitution. It implies there something inhuman and barbarous, something more than the mere extinguishment of life.” Id., at 447. We noted that the New York statute adopting electrocution as a method of execution “was passed in the effort to devise a more humane method of reaching the result.” 1316: (1958), at page 101, "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." Punishments including capital punishment must therefore not be "excessive". The "excessiveness" of a punishment can be measured by two different aspects, which are independent of each other. The first aspect is whether the punishment involves the unnecessary and wanton infliction of pain. The second aspect is that the punishment must not be grossly out of proportion to the severity of the crime. In 1039:... these are peculiarly questions of legislative policy"). The second is that any judicial determination regarding the gravity of a particular criminal offense will be inherently imprecise. Both of these principles counsel against requiring strict proportionality between the amount of a punitive forfeiture and the gravity of a criminal offense, and we therefore adopt the standard of gross disproportionality articulated in our Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause precedents. See, e.g., 420: 496: 1113:

letter from January 30, 1788, that the new Constitution would give the U.S. Congress the power "to ascertain, point out, and determine, what kind of punishments shall be inflicted on persons convicted of crimes." He added with respect those who would belong to the new government under the new Constitution: "They are nowhere restrained from inventing the most cruel and unheard-of punishments, and annexing them to crimes; and there is no constitutional check on them, but that

1920:, the Court ruled that Georgia's revised death penalty laws passed Eighth Amendment scrutiny: the statutes provided a bifurcated trial in which guilt and sentence were determined separately; and, the statutes provided for "specific jury findings" followed by state supreme court review comparing each death sentence "with the sentences imposed on similarly situated defendants to ensure that the sentence of death in a particular case is not disproportionate." Because of the 432: 444: 1322:, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), the Court explained that the Eighth Amendment "guarantees individuals the right not to be subjected to excessive sanctions", and that "punishment for crime should be graduated and proportioned to both the offender and the offense." The Supreme Court has also looked to "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society" when addressing the prohibition on cruel and unusual punishments. 1886: (1972). The Supreme Court overturned the death sentences of Furman for murder, as well as two other defendants for rape. Of the five justices voting to overturn the death penalty, two found that capital punishment was unconstitutionally cruel and unusual, while three found that the statutes at issue were implemented in a random and capricious fashion, discriminating against blacks and the poor. 1357:

capital punishment. Nor did the later addition of the Eighth Amendment outlaw the practice. The same Constitution that permits States to authorize capital punishment also allows them to outlaw it. While the Eighth Amendment doesn't forbid capital punishment, it does speak to how States may carry out that punishment, prohibiting methods that are 'cruel and unusual'." The Court also explained in

5251: (1991). Scalia wrote: "If 'cruel and unusual punishments' included disproportionate punishments, the separate prohibition of disproportionate fines (which are certainly punishments) would have been entirely superfluous." Moreover, "There is little doubt that those who framed, proposed, and ratified the Bill of Rights were aware of such provisions , yet chose not to replicate them." 943: (1989), the Supreme Court ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause does not apply "when the government neither has prosecuted the action nor has any right to receive a share of the damages awarded". While punitive damages in civil cases are not covered by the Excessive Fines Clause, such damages were held to be covered by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, notably in 731:

confession of the crime. They will say that they might as well draw examples from those countries as from Great Britain, and they will tell you that there is such a necessity of strengthening the arm of government, that they must have a criminal equity, and extort confession by torture, in order to punish with still more relentless severity. We are then lost and undone.

2258:, argue that societies may rot instead of maturing and may decrease in virtue or wisdom instead of increasing. Thus, they say, the framers wanted the amendment understood as it was written and ratified, instead of morphing as times change, and in any event legislators are more competent than judges to take the pulse of the public as to changing standards of decency. 912:

legislation of the states. The fixing of punishment for crime or penalties for unlawful acts against its laws is within the police power of the state. We can only interfere with such legislation and judicial action of the states enforcing it if the fines imposed are so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law.

1853:(2019) explicitly said: "The Constitution allows capital punishment. Nor did the later addition of the Eighth Amendment outlaw the practice. While the Eighth Amendment doesn’t forbid capital punishment, it does speak to how States may carry out that punishment, prohibiting methods that are 'cruel and unusual'." The Supreme Court also held in 530:. The amendment serves as a limitation upon the state or federal government to impose unduly harsh penalties on criminal defendants before and after a conviction. This limitation applies equally to the price for obtaining pretrial release and the punishment for crime after conviction. The phrases in this amendment originated in the 2351:. He writes: "But in reality, the word 'unusual' in the Eighth Amendment did not originally mean 'rare'– it meant 'contrary to long usage', or 'new'. A punishment is cruel and unusual if it is 'cruel in light of long usage' – that is, cruel in comparison to longstanding prior practice or tradition." Similarly, law professor 3965: 563:(1998). Under the Excessive Bail Clause, the Supreme Court has held that the federal government cannot set bail at "a figure higher than is reasonably calculated" to ensure the defendant's appearance at trial. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause and the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause 1241:

express letter of your Constitution, "cruel and unusual punishments" have been inflicted under State laws within this Union upon citizens, not only for crimes committed, but for sacred duty done, for which and against which the Government of the United States had provided no remedy and could provide none.

1817:

by ruling that the death penalty was excessive for child rape "where the victim's life was not taken". The Supreme Court failed to note a federal law, which applies to military court-martial proceedings, providing for the death penalty in cases of child rape. On October 1, 2008, the Court declined to

1240:

Many instances of State injustice and oppression have already occurred in the State legislation of this Union, of flagrant violations of the guarantied privileges of citizens of the United States, for which the national Government furnished and could furnish by law no remedy whatever. Contrary to the

700:

owever unlimited the power of the court may seem, it is far from being wholly arbitrary; but its discretion is regulated by law. For the bill of rights has particularly declared, that excessive fines ought not to be imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted: (which had a retrospect to some

2211:

because "the Fifth Amendment, added to the Constitution at the same time as the Eighth, expressly contemplates that a defendant may be tried for a 'capital' crime and 'deprived of life' as a penalty, so long as proper procedures are followed". The Court also explicitly said: "The Constitution allows

2198:

___ (2019) the Court ruled that when a convict sentenced to death challenges the State's method of execution due to claims of excessive pain, the convict must show that other alternative methods of execution exist and clearly demonstrate they would cause less pain than the state-determined one.

2183:

provides that "o person shall be held to answer for a capital . . . crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, . . . nor be deprived of life . . . without due process of law." This clearly permits the death penalty to be imposed, and establishes beyond doubt that the death penalty

1846:

1356:

1341:

2884:

ven if one stacked up all of Oates's punishments together—the fine, the whippings, the imprisonment, the pillorying, and the defrockment—their cumulative effect was less harsh as an absolute matter than some punishments considered acceptable at the time, such as drawing and quartering or burning at

2338:

Law professor John Stinneford asserts that the Eighth Amendment forbids punishments that are very disproportionate to the offense, even if the punishment by itself is not intrinsically barbaric, but he argues that "proportionality is to be measured primarily in terms of prior practice" according to

1112:

would misuse its powers to create federal crimes as well as to punish those who committed them under the new Constitution and thus use these powers as a way to oppress the people. Abraham Holmes, a member of the Massachusetts Ratifying Convention for the federal constitution, for example noted in a

730:

What has distinguished our ancestors?—That they would not admit of tortures, or cruel and barbarous punishment. But Congress may introduce the practice of the civil law, in preference to that of the common law. They may introduce the practice of France, Spain, and Germany--of torturing, to extort a

1712:

test and held that for non-capital sentences, the Eighth Amendment constrains only the length of prison terms by a "gross disproportionality principle". Under this principle, the Court sustained a mandatory sentence of life without parole imposed for possession of 672 grams (1.5 pounds) or more of

1022:

We must therefore rely on other considerations in deriving a constitutional excessiveness standard, and there are two that we find particularly relevant. The first, which we have emphasized in our cases interpreting the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, is that judgments about the appropriate

911:

t has contended that the fines imposed are so excessive as to constitute a taking of the defendant's property without due process of law. It is not contended in this connection that the prohibition of the Eighth Amendment to the federal Constitution against excessive fines operates to control the

1291:

Justice Brennan also wrote that he expected no state would pass a law obviously violating any one of these principles, so court decisions regarding the Eighth Amendment would involve a "cumulative" analysis of the implication of each of the four principles. In this way, the United States Supreme

2241:

said: "The Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." Subsequently, the Court has looked to societal developments, as well as looking to its own independent judgment, in determining what are those "evolving standards of

5186:

approach has a fatal flaw: It ignores the meaning of the word "unusual". ... he word "unusual" in the Eighth Amendment did not originally mean "rare"– it meant "contrary to long usage", or "new". A punishment is cruel and unusual if it is "cruel in light of long usage" – that is, cruel in

5177:

In response to the non-originalist approach to the Constitution, some judges and scholars – most prominently Justices Scalia and Thomas – have argued for a very narrow approach to original meaning that is almost willfully indifferent to current societal needs. ... My own research into the

2265:

The Framers of the Bill of Rights understood the word "unusual" to mean "contrary to long usage." Recognition of the word's original meaning will precisely invert the "evolving standards of decency" test, and ask the Court to compare challenged punishments with the longstanding principles and

1788:

stated that "death is indeed a disproportionate penalty for the crime of raping an adult woman." The dissent countered that the majority "takes too little account of the profound suffering the crime imposes upon the victims and their loved ones". The dissent also characterized the majority as

1287:

Justice Brennan added: "The function of these principles, after all, is simply to provide means by which a court can determine whether challenged punishment comports with human dignity. They are, therefore, interrelated, and, in most cases, it will be their convergence that will justify the

1361:

that “what unites the punishments the Eighth Amendment was understood to forbid, and distinguishes them from those it was understood to allow, is that the former were long disused (unusual) forms of punishment that intensified the sentence of death with a (cruel) superadd of terror, pain, or

591: 2624: 1566:, which mandated "hard and painful labor", shackling for the duration of incarceration, and permanent civil disabilities. This case is often viewed as establishing a principle of proportionality under the Eighth Amendment. However, others have written that "it is hard to view 685:

There is some scholarly dispute about whom the clause intended to limit. In England, the "cruel and unusual punishments" clause may have been a limitation on the discretion of judges, requiring them to adhere to precedent. According to the great treatise of the 1760s by

1626:

To be sure, imprisonment for ninety days is not, in the abstract, a punishment which is either cruel or unusual. But the question cannot be considered in the abstract. Even one day in prison would be a cruel and unusual punishment for the 'crime' of having a common

2285:

The Supreme Court has applied evolving standards not only to say what punishments are inherently cruel, but also to say what punishments that are not inherently cruel are nevertheless "grossly disproportionate" to the offense in question. An example can be seen in

2625:

Bryan A. Stevenson (Professor of Clinical Law, New York University School of Law, and Executive Director, Equal Justice Initiative); John F. Stinneford (Professor of Law and Assistant Director, Criminal Justice Center, University of Florida Levin College of Law).

4829: 2384:

argues that the amendment does not refer broadly to the imposition of penalties, but rather refers more narrowly to the penalties themselves; Epstein says judges who favor the broad view tend to omit the letter "s" at the end of the word "punishments".

2270:

On the other hand, law professor Dennis Baker defends the evolving standards of decency test as advancing the moral purpose of the Eighth Amendment to ban the inflicting of unjust, oppressive, or disproportional punishments by a state on its citizens.

725:

wanted to ensure this restriction would also be applied as a limitation on Congress. Mason warned that, otherwise, Congress may "inflict unusual and severe punishments". Henry emphasized that Congress should not be allowed to depart from precedent:

681:

against Titus Oates. Parliament then enacted the English Bill of Rights into law in December 1689. Members of parliament characterized the punishment in the Oates case as not just "barbarous" and "inhuman" but also "extravagant" and "exorbitant".

1051:

Thus the Court declared that, within the context of judicial deference to the legislature's power to set punishments, a fine would not offend the Eighth Amendment unless it were "grossly disproportional to the gravity of a defendant's offense".

789:

passed a statute in 1275 whereby bailable and non-bailable offenses were defined. The King's judges often subverted the provisions of the law. It was held that an individual may be held without bail upon the Sovereign's command. Eventually, the

1865:

794:

of 1628 argued that the King did not have such authority. Later, technicalities in the law were exploited to keep the accused imprisoned without bail even where the offenses were bailable; such loopholes were for the most part closed by the

556:

The Supreme Court has held that the Excessive Fines Clause prohibits fines that are "so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without due process of law". The Court struck down a fine as excessive for the first time in

4241: 1961: (1980), the Supreme Court overturned a sentence based upon a finding that a murder was "outrageously or wantonly vile, horrible, and inhuman", as it deemed that any murder may be reasonably characterized in this manner. Similarly, in 1944: (1976), because these laws remove discretion from the trial judge to make an individualized determination in each case. Other statutes specifying factors for courts to use in making their decisions have been upheld. Some have not: in 2072:

for fraud crimes totaling $ 230. A few months later, Rummel challenged his sentence for ineffective assistance of counsel, his appeal was upheld, and as part of a plea bargain Rummel pled guilty to theft and was released for time served.

802:

However, the English Bill of Rights did not determine the distinction between bailable and non-bailable offenses. Thus, the Eighth Amendment has been interpreted to mean that bail may be denied if the charges are sufficiently serious.

4466: 1076:

of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case involves the use of civil asset forfeiture to seize a $ 42,000 vehicle under state law in addition to the imposition of a $ 1,200 fine for drug trafficking charges, house arrest, and probation.

4753: 4546: 1292:

Court "set the standard that a punishment would be cruel and unusual it was too severe for the crime, it was arbitrary, if it offended society's sense of justice, or if it was not more effective than a less severe penalty."

753:(1977) it was decided that "Eighth Amendment judgments should not be, or appear to be, merely the subjective views of individual Justices; judgment should be informed by objective factors to the maximum possible extent." In 5075: 823: (1987), the Supreme Court held that the only limitation imposed by the Excessive Bail Clause is that "the government's proposed conditions of release or detention not be 'excessive' in light of the perceived evil". In 1622:" violated the Eighth Amendment, as narcotics addiction "is apparently an illness", and California was attempting to punish people based on the state of this illness, rather than for any specific act. The Court wrote: 4821: 2816:, page 293 (Edward Earle 1819). A judge in the Oates case said: "Crimes of this nature are left to be punished according to the Discretion of this Court, so far as that the Judgment extend not to Life or Member." See 990:

actions taken by the federal government, in the specific case, the government's seizure of the petitioner's auto body shop on the basis of one charge of drug possession for which he had served seven years in prison.

3305: 590: 2569:, 136 U. S. 436 (1890). There we rejected an opportunity to incorporate the Eighth Amendment against the States in a challenge to the first execution by electrocution, to be carried out by the State of New York. 840: (1951), the Supreme Court declared that a bail amount is "excessive" under the Eighth Amendment if it were "a figure higher than is reasonably calculated" to ensure the defendant's appearance at trial. 1978: (1988), the Court found that an "especially heinous, atrocious or cruel" standard in a homicide case was too vague. However, the meaning of this language depends on how lower courts interpret it. In 759:(2019) the Supreme Court stated that the Excessive Bail Clause, the Excessive Fines Clause and the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause together form a shield against abuses stemming from the government's 654:. The punishment of Oates involved ordinary penalties collectively imposed in a barbaric, excessive and bizarre manner. The reason why the judges in Oates' perjury case were not allowed to impose the 853:: "Bail, of course, is basic to our system of law, and the Eighth Amendment's proscription of excessive bail has been assumed to have application to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment." In 6980: 4250: 6670: 4745: 2261:

The "evolving standards" test has been subject to scholarly criticism. For example, law professor John Stinneford asserts that the "evolving standards" test misinterprets the Eighth Amendment:

406: 330: 4885:, 554 U. S. ____ (2008) Supreme Court Case No. 07-343. Note: For the evolving standards of decency see in general the slip opinion pages 1-5 and in special the opinion of the court pages 8-10" 1667:

Traditionally, the length of a prison sentence was not subject to scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment, regardless of the crime for which the sentence was imposed. It was not until the case of

799:. Thereafter, judges were compelled to set bail, but they often required impracticable amounts. Finally, the English Bill of Rights (1689) held that "excessive bail ought not to be required." 4482: 273: 2560:, at 137. What each of the forbidden punishments had in common was the deliberate infliction of pain for the sake of pain—“superadd” pain to the death sentence through torture and the like. 6488: 1784: (1977), the Court declared that the death penalty was unconstitutionally excessive for rape of a woman and, by implication, for any crime where a death does not occur. The majority in 119: 2335:

that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause is partly a prohibition of all punishments which, by their excessive length or severity, are greatly disproportioned to the offenses charged.

2248:(2008) the Supreme Court stated: "Evolving standards of decency must embrace and express respect for the dignity of the person, and the punishment of criminals must conform to that rule." 6995: 6425: 2508:, at 134–135. We noted there the difficulty of “defin with exactness the extent of the constitutional provision which provides that cruel and unusual punishments shall not be inflicted.” 2504:, 99 U. S. 130 (1879), we upheld a sentence to death by firing squad imposed by a territorial court, rejecting the argument that such a sentence constituted cruel and unusual punishment. 1822:) wrote in dissent that "the proposed Eighth Amendment would have been laughed to scorn if it had read 'no criminal penalty shall be imposed which the Supreme Court deems unacceptable'." 6945: 4558: 6039: 928: 1927:

Some states have passed laws imposing mandatory death penalties in certain cases. The Supreme Court found these laws unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment, in the murder case of

6526: 6793: 1995: (1990), the Court found that the phrase "especially heinous, cruel, or depraved" was not vague in a murder case, because the state supreme court had expounded on its meaning. 1495: (1988), the Supreme Court ruled that the death penalty constituted cruel and unusual punishment if the defendant is under age 16 when the crime was committed. Furthermore, in 1134:

that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause limits the criminal process in three ways: "irst, it limits the kinds of punishment that can be imposed on those convicted of crimes,

876: 1193: 6895: 6665: 2627: 1342:

is not one of the "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment." A similar observation was made by the Supreme Court in 2019. The Supreme Court held in

1031:... should grant substantial deference to the broad authority that legislatures necessarily possess in determining the types and limits of punishments for crimes"); see also 7612: 3338:"The Founders' Constitution Volume 5, Amendment VIII, Document 12, January 30, 1788 letter by Abraham Holmes, Massachusetts Ratifying Convention. In: Elliot, Jonathan, ed. 7627: 6965: 4135: 6498: 6382: 6182: 6114: 1847:

is not one of the "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment." A similar observation was made by the Supreme Court in 2019. The Supreme Court in

658:(unlike in the cases of those whom Oates had falsely accused) may be because such a punishment would have deterred even honest witnesses from testifying in later cases. 6950: 3917: 6368: 4943: 1232:

Court held that "infliction of cruel and unusual punishment is in violation of the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments." The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment, such as

399: 265: 3111: 646:

that had led to executions of many people Oates had wrongly accused. Oates was sentenced to imprisonment, including an annual ordeal of being taken out for two days'

7146: 6353: 6343: 5582: 4385: 250: 238: 6985: 916:

In essence, the government must not be able to confiscate such a large amount of property without following an established set of rules created by the legislature.

6363: 6358: 6348: 6338: 2280: 474: 260: 255: 245: 233: 1590: (1958), the Supreme Court held that punishing a natural-born citizen for a crime by revoking his citizenship is unconstitutional, being "more primitive than 6318: 4236:

Howard Gillman; Mark A. Graber; Keith E. Whittington (2013). "7: The Republican Era—Criminal Justice / Punishments / Capital Punishment, Supplementary Material:

1818:

reconsider its opinion in this case, but did amend the majority and dissenting opinions to acknowledge that federal law. Justice Scalia (joined by Chief Justice

211: 2498:

states: "This Court has never invalidated a State’s chosen procedure for carrying out a sentence of death as the infliction of cruel and unusual punishment. In

6328: 6323: 6292: 6287: 1374:, the Eighth Amendment forbids some punishments entirely, and forbids some other punishments that are excessive when compared to the crime, or compared to the 945: 223: 218: 196: 191: 6333: 6313: 6297: 5241: 5159:"Interpretation: The Eighth Amendment - Against Cruel Innovation: The Original Meaning of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, and Why It Matters Today" 4788: 4204: 3842: 3470: 3445: 2822: 2776: 2759: 2742: 2725: 2484: 2313: 2293: 2227: 2191: 2146: 2127: 2103: 2083: 2058: 2005: 1985: 1968: 1951: 1934: 1906: 1876: 1803: 1774: 1749: 1698: 1674: 1638: 1604: 1580: 1548: 1519: 1502: 1485: 1430: 1306: 1252: 1203: 1172: 1008: 976: 950: 933: 881: 830: 813: 228: 206: 201: 3309: 6890: 6264: 4309: 2034: 1738:(2010), the Supreme Court declared that a life sentence without any chance of parole, for a crime other than murder, is cruel and unusual punishment for a 1393: 181: 537:

The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments has led courts to hold that the Constitution totally prohibits certain kinds of punishment, such as

7141: 6269: 6233: 3420: 3340:

The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution as Recommended by the General Convention at Philadelphia in 1787

186: 159: 3171: 7664: 7545: 6975: 6870: 6218: 6208: 2184:

is not one of the "cruel and unusual punishments" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment." A similar observation was made by the Supreme Court in 2019. In

144: 134: 6680: 6248: 6243: 6228: 6223: 6213: 6203: 4714: 2180: 1843: 1713:

cocaine. The Court acknowledged that a punishment could be cruel but not unusual, and therefore not prohibited by the Constitution. Additionally, in

1338: 1299:

stated that the Eighth Amendment is not static, but that its meaning is interpreted in a flexible and dynamic manner to accord with, in the words of

1130:(1977) that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause was designed to protect those convicted of crimes. The Supreme Court consequently determined in 174: 169: 154: 149: 139: 129: 2412: 1899:

States with capital punishment rewrote their laws to address the Supreme Court's decision, and the Court then revisited the issue in a murder case:

891: (1909), the Supreme Court held that excessive fines are those that are "so grossly excessive as to amount to a deprivation of property without 2946: 2657: 4166: 3337: 2975: 1217:

was the first case in which the Supreme Court applied the Eighth Amendment against the state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. Before

7071: 6172: 6152: 6107: 4436: 2961: 2394: 900: 385: 376: 109: 89: 5286: 7556: 6162: 6157: 4516: 99: 94: 5202: 600:

The hand-written copy of the proposed Bill of Rights, 1789, cropped to just show the text that would later be ratified as the Eighth Amendment

6925: 6167: 6147: 6142: 4966: 104: 84: 79: 650:

plus one day of whipping while tied to a moving cart. The Oates case eventually became a topic of the U.S. Supreme Court's Eighth Amendment

7363: 6415: 500: 467: 310: 4076: 3055: 2891:

the punishments inflicted on Oates were unacceptably cruel, this could only be because they were disproportionate to the crime of perjury.

2797: 2093: (1991), the Court upheld a life sentence without the possibility of parole for possession of 672 grams (1.5 pounds) of cocaine. 1759: (2012), the Court went further, holding that mandatory life sentences without parole cannot be imposed on minors, even for homicide. 7076: 6875: 2451: 4279: 1108:

in the United States, Henry was concerned with the application of torture as a way of extracting confessions. They also feared that the

6611: 6137: 6100: 3681: 2266:

precedents of the common law, rather than shifting and nebulous notions of "societal consensus" and contemporary "standards of decency.

71: 36: 6850: 6820: 6606: 6571: 6551: 4624: 342: 337: 320: 4880: 3807: 3631: 3495: 2635: 62: 6855: 5331: 4654: 2671: 2343:

in the amendment, instead of being measured according to shifting and nebulous evolving standards. Stinneford argues that the word

7066: 2399: 1109: 546: 460: 4935: 7156: 6825: 6703: 4581: 4143: 3822: 3107: 2015: (1993), which involved the murder of a police officer, "the Eighth Amendment requires increased reliability of the process 6840: 7659: 7378: 6468: 6463: 6390: 5486: 3914: 3883: 1167: 631:... that excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." 281: 3551: 2556:, at 135. In contrast, we observed that the firing squad was routinely used as a method of execution for military officers. 1266:

wrote, "There are, then, four principles by which we may determine whether a particular punishment is 'cruel and unusual'."

7591: 7111: 6905: 764: 661:

England's declaration against "cruel and unusual punishments" was approved by Parliament in February 1689, and was read to

4401: 4362: 2976:"The Founders' Constitution Volume 5, Amendment VIII, Document 13, Debate in Virginia Ratifying Convention (16 June 1788)" 7487: 7106: 6698: 2446: 1189: 1069: 692: 678: 564: 5158: 4352:

Noteworthy are pages 201, 212–214 and 226–227 for a proportionality test under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause.

7674: 7669: 6743: 3939: 3233: 2356: 2208: 1862: 1371: 1353: 542: 354: 7086: 6448: 6123: 4701: 44: 2113: (2003), the Court upheld a 50 years to life sentence with the possibility of parole imposed under California's 1270:

The "essential predicate" is "that a punishment must not by its severity be degrading to human dignity," especially

7586: 6930: 3835:

The quoted sentence is from the opinion of Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, in the later case of

673:

on the following day. Members of Parliament then explained in August 1689 that "the Commons had a particular regard

6935: 6920: 2380:

where they denied that the Punishments Clause contains any proportionality principle. With Scalia and Rehnquist,

1998:

The Court has generally held that death penalty cases require extra procedural protections. As the Court said in

392: 349: 17: 4336: 7342: 5966: 5006: 2296:

decision outlawing corporal punishment in the Arkansas prison system: "The scope of the Amendment is not static

786: 710: 549:

in some instances, but capital punishment is still permitted in some cases where the defendant is convicted of

4798: 7654: 7116: 7056: 6645: 3674:

Whether the Food and Drug Administration Has Jurisdiction over Articles Intended for Use in Lawful Executions

3175: 2374:

Thus, Stinneford and Bessler disagree with the view of Justice Scalia, joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist, in

1869:

The first significant general challenge to capital punishment that reached the Supreme Court was the case of

1512: (2005), the Court barred the executing of people who were under age 18 when the crime was committed. In 714: 7606: 7404: 6835: 6708: 6513: 6395: 6195: 5324: 5162: 4139: 2631: 1097: 1091: 616: 580: 527: 523: 361: 288: 4722: 2675: 785:

originally determined whether to grant bail to criminal suspects. Since they tended to abuse their power,

7620: 7524: 7482: 7477: 6880: 6566: 6531: 6055: 5934: 4970: 4662: 3635: 3559: 2541: 1404: 1003: 855: 559: 538: 2520:, . . . and all others in the same line of unnecessary cruelty, are forbidden” by the Eighth Amendment. 7574: 7021: 6990: 6713: 6478: 6473: 3915:

Does the Eighth Amendment Punishments Clause Prohibit Only Punishments that Are Both Cruel and Unusual?

3345: 2983: 670: 550: 515: 5200:"Revisiting Beccaria's Vision: The Enlightenment, America's Death Penalty, and the Abolition Movement" 4444: 2300:...isproportion, both among punishments and between punishment and crime, is a factor to be considered 7322: 7202: 7001: 6733: 6556: 6433: 6279: 5918: 5590: 5281: 3250: 2928: 2810: 2045: 1929: 677:... when that Declaration was first made" to punishments like the one that had been inflicted by the 366: 4524: 4077:"Statement of Justice Scalia, with whom the Chief Justice joins, respecting the denial of rehearing" 7291: 7161: 7025: 6885: 6804: 6650: 6640: 6508: 6071: 6018: 5199: 4287: 3970: 1530: 808: 4974: 2813: 2692: 7081: 7029: 6955: 6783: 6660: 6655: 6591: 6561: 6503: 6047: 5443: 5317: 4939: 4019: 3677: 2404: 2363:

in the 1760s, which advocated proportionate punishments; many of the Founding Fathers, including

2068: (1980), the Court upheld a life sentence with the possibility of parole imposed per Texas's 1440: (1962) concurrence opinion that "historic punishments that were cruel and unusual included " 1221:, the Eighth Amendment had been applied previously only in cases against the federal government. 972: 859:(2010), the right against excessive bail was included in a footnote listing incorporated rights. 717:

recommended in 1788 that this language also be included in the Constitution. Virginians such as

7244: 6763: 6688: 6635: 6586: 6410: 6030: 5894: 5494: 5379: 5371: 4856:, 139 S. Ct. 1112, 1124 (2019) (internal quotations omitted). Opinion of the Court, Part II A." 4113:, 139 S. Ct. 1112, 1124 (2019) (internal quotations omitted). Opinion of the Court, Part II A." 3875: 3863: 3699:, 139 S. Ct. 1112, 1124 (2019) (internal quotations omitted). Opinion of the Court, Part II A." 3258: 3066: 2771: 2598: 2565: 2325: 1615: 1599: 1594:" because it involved the "total destruction of the individual's status in organized society". 1562:

to overturn a criminal sentence as cruel and unusual. The Court overturned a punishment called

1543: 1425: 1263: 1213: (1962), the Court ruled that it did apply to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. 1198: 1157: 1149: 1124:

Relying on the history of the Eighth Amendment and its own caselaw the Supreme Court stated in

1035:, 357 U.S. 386, 393 (1958) ("Whatever views may be entertained regarding severity of punishment 796: 662: 305: 5038: 4048: 3900: 1154:; and third, it imposes substantive limits on what can be made criminal and punished as such, 701:

unprecedented proceedings in the court of king's bench, in the reign of king James the second)

7451: 6830: 6798: 6629: 6458: 6405: 6001: 5798: 5742: 5622: 5261: 5245: 4208: 4181: 3846: 3474: 3465: 3449: 3197: 2826: 2780: 2763: 2746: 2729: 2488: 2381: 2317: 2231: 2195: 2150: 2131: 2107: 2087: 2062: 2038: 2009: 1989: 1972: 1963: 1955: 1938: 1910: 1880: 1807: 1778: 1753: 1702: 1678: 1642: 1608: 1584: 1552: 1523: 1506: 1489: 1434: 1397: 1310: 1256: 1207: 1176: 1012: 980: 954: 937: 885: 834: 817: 776: 624: 576: 519: 298: 3673: 54: 7596: 7151: 6865: 6860: 6815: 6788: 6738: 6483: 5758: 5654: 5646: 5630: 5614: 5459: 5403: 5236: 4851: 4108: 4083: 3837: 3720: 3694: 3484:

that the Eighth Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights be applied against the states.

3434: 2720: 2532:, or disgrace were sometimes superadded” to the sentence, such as where the condemned was “ 2376: 2244: 2078: 1798: 1693: 1614: (1962), the Court decided a California law authorizing a 90-day jail sentence for "be 1480: 1475: 1465: 597: 424: 5309: 4891: 4632: 4136:"The Supreme Court's evolving record on capital punishment - National Constitution Center" 8: 7579: 7368: 7096: 6960: 6748: 6693: 6596: 6453: 5859: 5814: 5550: 5451: 5411: 4553:

Washington State Dept. of Social & Health Services v. Guardianship Estate of Keffeler

3643: 3499: 2818: 2431: 2186: 2137: (2008) the Court upheld Kentucky's execution protocol using a three-drug cocktail. 2117:

when the defendant was convicted of shoplifting videotapes worth a total of about $ 150.

1849: 1649: 1470: 1344: 986: (1993), the Supreme Court ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause does apply to civil 639: 620: 531: 4674: 4314:: Leaving the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause in Consitutional [sic] Limbo" 1890:

did not hold—even though it is sometimes claimed that it did—that capital punishment is

1419:

constituted cruel and unusual punishment. Relying on Eighth Amendment case law Justice

1146:

second, it proscribes punishment grossly disproportionate to the severity of the crime,

7281: 7265: 7126: 6940: 6915: 6900: 6810: 6778: 6768: 6728: 6718: 5926: 5851: 5806: 5678: 5670: 5598: 5574: 5542: 5510: 5419: 5248: 5131: 5026: 4905: 4793: 4670: 4666: 4328: 4211: 4053: 3992: 3849: 3780: 3639: 3596: 3567: 3563: 3521: 3456: 3452: 3393: 3367: 3279: 3017: 2829: 2783: 2766: 2749: 2737: 2732: 2320: 2204: 2172: 2153: 2098: 2090: 2065: 2012: 2000: 1992: 1975: 1958: 1946: 1941: 1913: 1883: 1858: 1835: 1810: 1781: 1756: 1705: 1681: 1645: 1611: 1555: 1526: 1514: 1509: 1492: 1437: 1420: 1349: 1330: 1259: 1210: 1179: 1126: 1073: 1015: 983: 957: 940: 892: 820: 687: 666: 4989:"The Original Meaning of 'Unusual': The Eighth Amendment as a Bar to Cruel Innovation" 4182:

The Death Penalty: An American Citizen's Guide to Understanding Federal and State Laws

3758: 3477: 2491: 2234: 2134: 2110: 2041: 1735: 1587: 1400: 1313: 1096:

The Constitution was amended to prohibit cruel and unusual punishments as part of the

1023:

punishment for an offense belong in the first instance to the legislature. See, e.g.,

888: 7601: 7347: 7332: 7312: 7186: 7061: 7040: 7012: 6616: 6443: 5942: 5910: 5835: 5726: 5694: 5662: 5558: 5502: 5478: 5435: 5427: 5387: 5034: 5030: 4936:"The Heritage Guide to the Constitution: Amendment VIII Cruel and Unusual Punishment" 3879: 3440: 3133: 2754: 2651: 2500: 2439: 2423: 2331: 2288: 2114: 2069: 2053: 2029: 1980: 1871: 1744: 1730: 1722: 1685: 1388: 1318: 1247: 1137: 837: 791: 6092: 4589: 4332: 3496:"Seminal Cases—Brief Bank & General Resources—the International Justice Project" 2347:

in the Eighth Amendment has a very different meaning in comparison to those who use

1688:

without parole for cashing a $ 100 check on a closed account was cruel and unusual.

7223: 6970: 6845: 6773: 6758: 6493: 6438: 6400: 6063: 5958: 5843: 5782: 5774: 5702: 5638: 5606: 5566: 5526: 5518: 5018: 4044: 3480: (1947); Black and three other dissenting justices had unsuccessfully urged in 2549: 2417: 2364: 2157: 2142: 1901: 1790: 1769: 1497: 1441: 1412: 1375: 1064: 987: 755: 749: 293: 5022: 7508: 7456: 7337: 7296: 7207: 7131: 7035: 7017: 6753: 6723: 6581: 5902: 5766: 5734: 5718: 5710: 5686: 5534: 5290: 5206: 5183: 4199: 3921: 3571: 3237: 2360: 1633: 1563: 1559: 899:

The fixing of punishment for crime and penalties for unlawful acts is within the

448: 4235: 3632:"Concurring in the denial of certiori, Callins v. Collins, 510 U.S. 1141 (1994)" 739:

changed "ought" to "shall", when he proposed the amendment to Congress in 1789.

7446: 7425: 7409: 7373: 7317: 7286: 7101: 6010: 5950: 5886: 5867: 5790: 5179: 4426:, 501 U.S. 957, 111 S. Ct. 2680, 115 L. Ed. 2d 836, 1991 U.S. LEXIS 3816 (1991) 3627: 2533: 2255: 2222: 2168: 1831: 1718: 1575: 1461: 1449: 1416: 1326: 1301: 1225: 1141: 1114: 825: 3306:"Supreme Court Limits Asset Forfeiture, Rules Excessive Fines Apply To States" 1280:"A severe punishment that is clearly and totally rejected throughout society." 1277:"A severe punishment that is obviously inflicted in wholly arbitrary fashion." 526:. This amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the 7648: 7551: 7472: 7430: 7399: 7327: 7249: 7121: 7091: 7007: 6910: 6621: 6576: 5395: 5224:

The Birth of American Law: An Italian Philosopher and the American Revolution

4478: 3549: 2368: 1669: 1457: 1101: 848: 806:

The Supreme Court has also permitted "preventive" detention without bail. In

736: 735:

Ultimately, Henry and Mason prevailed, and the Eighth Amendment was adopted.

722: 655: 651: 5296: 4269:, 445 U.S. 263, 100 S. Ct. 1133, 63 L. Ed. 2d 382, 1980 U.S. LEXIS 90 (1980) 760: 5750: 4700:, 576 U.S. 863, 135 S. Ct. 2726, 191 L. Ed. 2d 148, 2015 WL 341665 (2015). 2869:"Rethinking Proportionality under the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause" 2537: 2495: 2479: 2352: 2122: 1819: 1233: 718: 495: 4822:"Divided Supreme Court rules against death-row inmate with rare condition" 4695: 2676:"EIGHTH AMENDMENT ---- FURTHER GUARANTEES IN CRIMINAL CASES ---- CONTENTS" 2524:, at 136. By way of example, the Court cited cases from England in which “ 7503: 7383: 4400:(1). Washington and Lee University School of Law: 243–256. Archived from 2348: 2251: 2238: 1739: 1445: 1105: 635: 5178:

original meaning of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause shows that

2525: 1892: 443: 7228: 3943: 3871: 3460: 2545: 1408: 436: 4789:"Rancor and Raw Emotion Surface in Supreme Court Death Penalty Ruling" 3108:"The Heritage Guide to the Constitution: Cruel and Unusual Punishment" 1100:

as a result of objections raised by people such as Abraham Holmes and

7136: 4226:, 99 U.S. 130, 25 L. Ed. 345, 9 Otto 130, 1878 U.S. LEXIS 1517 (1878) 3601:, 567 U.S. 460 (2012), at 469 (citation and quotation marks omitted)" 2947:

The Great Rights of Mankind: A History of the American Bill of Rights

2161: 1118: 843:

The incorporation status of the Excessive Bail Clause is unclear. In

709:

Virginia adopted this provision of the English Bill of Rights in the

5042: 4988: 3545: 3543: 3342:. . . . 5 vols. 2d ed. 1888. Reprint. New York: Burt Franklin, n.d." 2913: 2868: 2670: 487: 431: 6040:

Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.

3622: 3620: 3618: 3255:

in the wake of the Supreme Court's civil double jeopardy excursion"

2847: 1619: 1184: 929:

Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.

2901:

cruel and 'contrary to long usage'". Id. at 977 (emphasis added).

2516:

Court simply noted that “it is safe to affirm that punishments of

1474:, 309 U. S. 227, 309 U. S. 237), and, in some circumstances, even 1378:

of the perpetrator. This will be discussed in the sections below.

7171: 6601: 3540: 2962:

The Bill of Rights: Politics, Religion, and the Quest for Justice

2697: 2517: 1591: 1271: 782: 647: 643: 4910:, 554 U.S. 407 (2008), Opinion of the Court, Part IV, section A" 4167:

Racial Issues in Criminal Justice: The Case of African Americans

3808:

Cruel and Unusual Punishment: Rights and Liberties Under the Law

3615: 3421:

The Body and the State: Habeas Corpus and American Jurisprudence

3065:. United States Supreme Court. February 20, 2019. Archived from 2895:

But, says Stinneford, punishment is unacceptable only if it is "

2048:

is not cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment.

1570:

as announcing a constitutional requirement of proportionality."

1381: 619:, in 1791. It is almost identical to a provision in the English 1793:" for considering legal history of only "the past five years". 1558: (1910), marked the first time the Supreme Court exercised 1121:

may be amongst the most mild instruments of their discipline."

1529: (2002), the Court declared that executing people who are 3725:, 139 S. Ct. 1112, 1124 (2019) (internal quotations omitted)" 3493: 3459:). The same words of John Bingham had been quoted in Justice 1825: 634:

The provision was largely inspired by the case in England of

627:

declared, "as their ancestors in like cases have usually done

567:, but has not done this regarding the Excessive Bail Clause. 5339: 3966:"Justices rule on prison time for juveniles, sex offenders" 3331: 3329: 3327: 2529: 1536: 1478:(see In re Medley, 134 U. S. 160, 134 U. S. 167-168)." In 491:

Pertinent part of the English Bill of Rights, December 1689

4243:

American Constitutionalism Volume II: Rights and Liberties

3308:. National Public Radio. February 20, 2019. Archived from 5121:, 458 U.S. 782, 102 S. Ct. 3368, 73 L. Ed. 2d 1140 (1982) 3224:, 509 U.S. 602, 113 S. Ct. 2801, 125 L. Ed. 2d 488 (1993) 4929: 4927: 4777:, 587 U.S. ___, 139 S. Ct. 582, 202 L. Ed. 2d 401 (2019) 4613:, 553 U.S. 35, 128 S. Ct. 1520, 170 L. Ed. 2d 420 (2008) 4506:, 583 U.S. 63, 123 S. Ct. 1166, 155 L. Ed. 2d 144 (2003) 4390:: Can Non-Capital Punishment Still Be Cruel and Unusual" 3324: 2512:, at 135–136. Rather than undertake such an effort, the 2281:

Felony murder and the death penalty in the United States

1068:

the Supreme Court ruled that the Excessive Fines Clause

579:

shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor

5187:

comparison to longstanding prior practice or tradition.

3550:

Eric Finkelstein; Michael Zuckerman; Richard Beaulieu.

2599:"Bill of Rights: Primary Documents of American History" 715:

Virginia convention that ratified the U.S. Constitution

2371:, read Beccaria's treatise and were influenced by it. 946:

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Campbell

6122: 4924: 4625:"Supreme Court Allows Lethal Injection for Execution" 4475:

Casebriefs - Law Cases & Case Briefs for Students

3901:

The Social History of Crime and Punishment in America

3007:, 433 U.S. 584, 97 S. Ct. 2861, 53 L.Ed.2d 982 (1977) 541:. Under the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause, the 4557:. Wiggin and Dana LLP. March 6, 2003. Archived from 4523:. LawPipe Online Legal Research Tool. Archived from 4443:. LawPipe Online Legal Research Tool. Archived from 4286:. LawPipe Online Legal Research Tool. Archived from 4082:. Supreme Court of the United States. Archived from 4020:"Supreme Court Rejects Death Penalty for Child Rape" 3060:, 586 U.S. ___ (2019), Opinion of the Court, page 2" 2022: 1283:"A severe punishment that is patently unnecessary." 7546:Notes of Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787 5079:, 404 F. 2d 571—Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit 1968 4746:"Supreme Court upholds lethal injection procedure" 3963: 3140:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. November 5, 1951 1708: (1991), a fractured Court retreated from the 5097:, 144 U.S. 323, 12 S.Ct. 693, 36 L.Ed. 450 (1892) 1813: (2008), the Court extended the reasoning of 867: 615:The Eighth Amendment was adopted, as part of the 605: 7646: 5353: 3761:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. April 16, 2008 3727:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. March 31, 2019 3400:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. April 19, 1977 3374:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. April 19, 1977 3198:"More on Large Civil Fines for Minor Violations" 2215: 1648: (1968), the Court upheld a statute barring 1080: 5283:Original Meaning: Cruel and Unusual Punishments 5211:Northwestern Journal of Law & Social Policy 4327:(1). Valpraiso University: 201–227. Fall 1980. 4049:"In Court Ruling on Executions, a Factual Flaw" 3999:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 25, 2012 3823:Commonsense Justice: Jurors' Notions of the Law 3787:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 25, 1962 3672:, 139 S. Ct. 1112, 1122 (2019); discussed in: " 3603:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 25, 2012 3438:, 39th Cong., 1st Sess., 2542 (1866) quoted in 3344:The University of Chicago Press. Archived from 3286:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 22, 1998 3024:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. June 29, 1977 2395:United States constitutional criminal procedure 1104:. While Holmes feared the establishment of the 7557:Bibliography of the United States Constitution 5138:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. July 2, 1982 4858:Justia US Supreme Court Center. March 31, 2019 4115:Justia US Supreme Court Center. March 31, 2019 3701:Justia US Supreme Court Center. March 31, 2019 3626: 3528:. Justia US Supreme Court Center. July 2, 1976 3174:. Revolutionary War and Beyond. Archived from 3101: 3099: 2349:originalism to interpret the U.S. Constitution 1403: (1878), the Supreme Court commented that 1194:Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment 1188:that the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause 994: 6108: 5325: 5301: 3093:, 342 U.S. 1, 72 S. Ct. 1, 96 L. Ed. 3 (1951) 2801:, page 114 (Greenwood Publishing Group 1992). 2628:"The Eighth Amendment: Common Interpretation" 2620: 2618: 2616: 1382:Punishments forbidden regardless of the crime 1027:, 463 U.S. 277, 290 (1983) ("Reviewing courts 468: 27:1791 amendment regulating forms of punishment 5990: 4715:"Supreme Court Allows Use of Execution Drug" 2656:: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list ( 1664:, not merely for being addicted to alcohol. 3964:Mauro, Tony; Coyle, Marcia (May 17, 2010). 3826:, page 138 (Harvard University Press 2001). 3665: 3663: 3661: 3455: (1972) (concurring opinion of Justice 3096: 3045:, 139 S. Ct. 682, 203 L. Ed. 2d 11, (2019) 2950:, page 170 (Rowman & Littlefield 1992). 2940: 2938: 2452:Infectious diseases within American prisons 2304:..." Relying on and citing its early cases 919: 847:, 404 U.S. 357 (1971), the Court stated in 6115: 6101: 5332: 5318: 4875: 4873: 4622: 4414:(article 18) See footnote 104 at page 253. 4043: 4017: 3680:memorandum opinion of May 3, 2019, p. 16. 3105: 2866: 2848:"The Anti-Discrimination Eighth Amendment" 2613: 1826:Special procedures for death penalty cases 1533:constituted cruel and unusual punishment. 963: 475: 461: 7665:United States criminal constitutional law 4249:. Oxford University Press. Archived from 4217: 3940:"Analysis: A limited break for juveniles" 3937: 3591: 3589: 2867:Stinneford, John F. (February 18, 2011). 2862: 2860: 2156: (2015) the Court upheld the use of 1762: 907:The Court further stated in its opinion: 7613:Scene at the Signing of the Constitution 5007:"Constitutionalizing the Harm Principle" 4417: 3861: 3658: 2935: 2852:Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy 2814:A Practical Treatise on the Criminal Law 2672:United States Government Printing Office 1537:Punishments forbidden for certain crimes 642:in 1685, was tried for multiple acts of 494: 486: 4964: 4870: 4768: 4689: 4497: 4383: 3248: 2842: 2840: 2838: 2563:We carried these principles further in 2400:Capital punishment in the United States 1182: (1947), the Supreme Court assumed 14: 7647: 5156: 5005:Baker, Dennis J. (November 12, 2008). 4819: 4786: 4743: 4712: 4384:Bedford, Edward J. (January 1, 1981). 4260: 4133: 4074: 3684:from the original on November 6, 2020. 3586: 3335: 2857: 2413:Healthcare in American women's prisons 1924:decision, executions resumed in 1977. 1295:The plurality of the Supreme Court in 1070:applies to state and local governments 6096: 5989: 5487:Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber 5352: 5313: 5300: 5226:(Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press) 5213:, Volume 4, Issue 2, Article 1 (2009) 5004: 3336:Holmes, Abrahahm (January 30, 1788). 3249:Soloman, Matthew C. (February 1999). 2917:UMKC Law Review 86(2): 259-294 (2017) 2494: (2008) written by Chief Justice 1168:Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber 7592:Constitution Day and Citizenship Day 5109:, 217 U.S. 349, 30 S. Ct. 544 (1910) 4946:from the original on August 22, 2020 4832:from the original on August 20, 2020 4756:from the original on August 20, 2020 4623:Greenhouse, Linda (April 17, 2008). 4604: 4579: 2881:Stinneford writes (emphasis added): 2835: 1085: 895:". The Court wrote in its syllabus: 7580:Rotunda for the Charters of Freedom 7107:Incorporation of the Bill of Rights 4965:Roberts, Jane (December 17, 2013). 4075:Scalia, Antonin (October 1, 2008). 4018:Greenhouse, Linda (June 26, 2008). 3805:Melusky, Anthony and Pesto, Keith. 3785:, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), at page 675" 3494:the International Justice Project. 3114:from the original on April 15, 2013 2447:Prisoner abuse in the United States 2409:Medical care and safety of inmates 1365: 1055: 693:Commentaries on the Laws of England 545:has struck down the application of 24: 6671:Drafting and ratification timeline 6416:District of Columbia Voting Rights 5262:"The Constitution's Vanishing Act" 4993:Northwestern University Law Review 4197:was overruled on other grounds by 3759:"Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (2008)" 3526:, 428 U.S. 153 (1976), at 169-173" 3372:, 430 U.S. 651 (1977), at 664-667" 2357:An Essay on Crimes and Punishments 2274: 2209:death penalty in the United States 2044: (1878) the Court stated that 1863:death penalty in the United States 1660:dealt with a person who was drunk 1354:death penalty in the United States 862: 765:criminal-law-enforcement authority 742: 331:Drafting and ratification timeline 25: 7686: 6124:Constitution of the United States 5275: 4933: 2693:"Annotation 3 - Eighth Amendment" 1456:, 136 U. S. 436, 136 U. S. 446), 770: 6527:Convention to propose amendments 5254: 5229: 5216: 5192: 5150: 4912:. Justia US Supreme Court Center 4820:Barnes, Robert (April 1, 2019). 4744:Barnes, Robert (June 29, 2015). 4673:. April 16, 2008. Archived from 4580:Peña, Maria (October 31, 2011). 4321:Valparaiso University Law Review 3938:Denniston, Lyle (May 17, 2010). 3926:Washington University Law Review 2023:Punishments specifically allowed 589: 442: 430: 418: 53: 5124: 5112: 5100: 5084: 5069: 5066:, 404 F. 2d 571 (8th Cir. 1968) 5057: 4998: 4981: 4967:"Scalia Defends U.S. Judiciary" 4958: 4898: 4890:. June 25, 2008. Archived from 4844: 4813: 4780: 4737: 4706: 4647: 4616: 4573: 4539: 4509: 4459: 4429: 4377: 4355: 4302: 4272: 4229: 4188: 4173: 4158: 4134:Bomboy, Scott (July 28, 2014). 4127: 4101: 4068: 4037: 4011: 3985: 3957: 3931: 3907: 3892: 3855: 3829: 3814: 3799: 3773: 3751: 3739: 3713: 3687: 3514: 3487: 3427: 3412: 3386: 3360: 3298: 3272: 3242: 3227: 3215: 3190: 3164: 3152: 3126: 3084: 3048: 3036: 3010: 2998: 2982:. June 16, 1788. Archived from 2980:The University of Chicago Press 2968: 2953: 2920: 2905: 2471: 2329:the Supreme Court concluded in 2199:The Supreme Court also held in 7142:Separation of church and state 5967:City of Grants Pass v. Johnson 5341:United States Eighth Amendment 5136:, 458 U.S. 782 (1982), at 788" 4787:Liptak, Adam (April 1, 2019). 4713:Liptak, Adam (June 29, 2015). 3398:, 430 U.S. 651 (1977), at 667" 3284:, 524 U.S. 321 (1998), at 334" 3022:, 433 U.S. 584 (1977), at 592" 2804: 2789: 2712: 2685: 2664: 2591: 1236:, had discussed this subject: 877:Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas 869:Waters-Pierce Oil Co. v. Texas 711:Virginia Declaration of Rights 606:Background and general aspects 532:English Bill of Rights of 1689 120:Amendments to the Constitution 13: 1: 6646:Virginia Ratifying Convention 5023:10.1080/0731129X.2008.9992238 4394:Washington and Lee Law Review 2459: 2216:Evolving standards of decency 1081:Cruel and unusual punishments 610: 581:cruel and unusual punishments 524:cruel and unusual punishments 7660:United States Bill of Rights 7607:National Constitution Center 7405:Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer 6704:Assemble and Petition Clause 5354:Cruel and unusual punishment 5163:National Constitution Center 4170:, page 180 (Greenwood 2003). 4140:National Constitution Center 3552:"LII Supreme Court Bulletin 3424:, page 99 (SUNY Press 2006). 2632:National Constitution Center 1098:United States Bill of Rights 1092:Cruel and unusual punishment 638:who, after the accession of 528:United States Bill of Rights 7: 7478:Charles Cotesworth Pinckney 6532:State ratifying conventions 6469:Equal Opportunity to Govern 6464:Electoral College abolition 6391:Congressional Apportionment 6056:United States v. Bajakajian 4971:Scripps Howard News Service 4663:Legal Information Institute 4588:. Prezi Inc. Archived from 4185:, page 14 (McFarland 1998). 3928:, Volume 87, p. 567 (2010). 3636:Legal Information Institute 3560:Legal Information Institute 3282:United States v. Bajakajian 3253:United States v. Bajakajian 3251:"The perils of minimalism: 3172:"8th Amendment Court Cases" 3110:. The Heritage Foundation. 2388: 2237: (1958), Chief Justice 1047:, 445 U.S. 263, 271 (1980). 1004:United States v. Bajakajian 996:United States v. Bajakajian 856:McDonald v. City of Chicago 560:United States v. Bajakajian 386:Preamble and Articles I–VII 282:Congressional Apportionment 10: 7691: 4238:Wilkerson v. State of Utah 3920:December 19, 2013, at the 3868:Understanding Criminal Law 3811:, page 87 (ABC-CLIO 2003). 3138:, 342 U.S. 1 (1951), at 5" 2278: 1721:, joined by Chief Justice 1089: 774: 518:protects against imposing 516:United States Constitution 499:The Bill of Rights in the 7675:Bail in the United States 7670:1791 in American politics 7565: 7537: 7517: 7496: 7465: 7439: 7418: 7392: 7356: 7305: 7274: 7258: 7237: 7216: 7195: 7179: 7170: 7049: 6931:Privileges and Immunities 6744:Congressional enforcement 6679: 6666:Rhode Island ratification 6557:Articles of Confederation 6544: 6522: 6499:Parental Rights amendment 6424: 6381: 6306: 6278: 6257: 6194: 6190: 6181: 6130: 6029: 6000: 5996: 5985: 5919:South Carolina v. Gathers 5878: 5825: 5591:Skipper v. South Carolina 5470: 5363: 5359: 5348: 5307: 5302:Links to related articles 5293:—LOC Historian PA Madison 4995:, Vol. 102, No. 4 (2008). 3862:Dressler, Joshua (2009). 3676:", Department of Justice 2477:The plurality opinion in 1930:Woodson v. North Carolina 901:police power of the state 367:Reconstruction Amendments 7162:Unitary executive theory 6936:Privileges or Immunities 6651:New York Circular Letter 6641:Massachusetts Compromise 6072:Tyler v. Hennepin County 6019:United States v. Salerno 5991:Excessive bail and fines 3971:The National Law Journal 921:Browning-Ferris v. Kelco 809:United States v. Salerno 425:United States portal 35:This article is part of 7082:Dormant Commerce Clause 6926:Presidential succession 6661:Fayetteville Convention 6656:Hillsborough Convention 6592:Three-fifths Compromise 6572:Philadelphia Convention 6562:Mount Vernon Conference 6449:Campaign finance reform 6048:Austin v. United States 5583:Caldwell v. Mississippi 5444:Montgomery v. Louisiana 5205:March 21, 2012, at the 5011:Criminal Justice Ethics 4940:The Heritage Foundation 4240:, 99 U.S. 130 (1878)". 3678:Office of Legal Counsel 3222:Austin v. United States 2405:Crimes against humanity 973:Austin v. United States 965:Austin v. United States 570: 7245:William Samuel Johnson 7117:Nondelegation doctrine 6689:Admission to the Union 6636:Anti-Federalist Papers 6587:Connecticut Compromise 6031:Excessive Fines Clause 5895:Robinson v. California 5511:California v. Anderson 5495:McGautha v. California 5380:Robinson v. California 5372:Weems v. United States 5289:July 30, 2012, at the 5189: 5107:Weems v. United States 3997:, 567 U.S. 460 (2012)" 3783:Robinson v. California 3259:Georgetown Law Journal 2914:Who are the Punishers? 2893: 2772:Weems v. United States 2326:Weems v. United States 2268: 1763:Death penalty for rape 1742:. Two years later, in 1629: 1600:Robinson v. California 1544:Weems v. United States 1426:Robinson v. California 1405:drawing and quartering 1243: 1199:Robinson v. California 1158:Robinson v. California 1150:Weems v. United States 1049: 914: 905: 797:Habeas Corpus Act 1679 733: 707: 621:Bill of Rights of 1689 585: 539:drawing and quartering 522:, excessive fines, or 503: 492: 7452:Richard Dobbs Spaight 6921:Presidential Electors 6896:Original Jurisdiction 6836:Full Faith and Credit 6709:Assistance of Counsel 6630:The Federalist Papers 6459:Crittenden Compromise 6002:Excessive Bail Clause 5743:Panetti v. Quarterman 5623:Maynard v. Cartwright 5175: 4977:on December 19, 2013. 4635:on September 20, 2019 4586:, 538 U.S. 63 (2003)" 3904:, p. 416 (SAGE 2012). 3630:(February 22, 1994). 3466:Adamson v. California 2926:Blackstone, William. 2882: 2601:. Library of Congress 2263: 2207:expressly allows the 2046:death by firing squad 1964:Maynard v. Cartwright 1861:expressly allows the 1624: 1450:breaking on the wheel 1352:expressly allows the 1238: 1190:applied to the states 1033:Gore v. United States 1020: 909: 897: 777:Excessive Bail Clause 728: 698: 574: 498: 490: 407:Unratified Amendments 274:Unratified Amendments 63:Preamble and Articles 7655:1791 in American law 7621:A More Perfect Union 7597:Constitution Gardens 7518:Convention Secretary 7180:Convention President 7152:Symmetric federalism 7147:Separation of powers 6881:Necessary and Proper 6876:Natural-born citizen 6821:Freedom of the Press 6759:Copyright and Patent 6749:Contingent Elections 6567:Annapolis Convention 5759:Kennedy v. Louisiana 5655:Whitmore v. Arkansas 5647:Stanford v. Kentucky 5631:Thompson v. Oklahoma 5615:Lowenfield v. Phelps 5460:Jones v. Mississippi 5404:Harmelin v. Michigan 5268:(December 16, 2013). 5237:Harmelin v. Michigan 5157:Stinneford, John F. 4908:Kennedy v. Louisiana 4894:on January 26, 2020. 4883:Kennedy v. Louisiana 4469:Harmelin v. Michigan 4439:Harmelin v. Michigan 4424:Harmelin v. Michigan 4342:on February 18, 2019 3838:Harmelin v. Michigan 3348:on December 23, 2019 3072:on December 11, 2020 2721:Harmelin v. Michigan 2544:,” or instances of “ 2377:Harmelin v. Michigan 2245:Kennedy v. Louisiana 2079:Harmelin v. Michigan 1799:Kennedy v. Louisiana 1694:Harmelin v. Michigan 1531:mentally handicapped 1481:Thompson v. Oklahoma 1476:solitary confinement 1442:burning at the stake 671:Declaration of Right 47:of the United States 7628:Worldwide influence 7369:Gunning Bedford Jr. 7097:Executive privilege 7077:Criminal sentencing 7000:Title of Nobility ( 6991:Taxing and Spending 6891:Oath or Affirmation 6851:House Apportionment 6714:Case or Controversy 6597:Committee of Detail 6489:"Liberty" amendment 6454:Christian amendment 5935:Helling v. McKinney 5860:Hudson v. McMillian 5826:Corporal punishment 5815:Bucklew v. Precythe 5551:Spaziano v. Florida 5452:Virginia v. LeBlanc 5412:Ewing v. California 4854:Bucklew v. Precythe 4826:The Washington Post 4775:Bucklew v. Precythe 4750:The Washington Post 4256:on August 17, 2020. 4111:Bucklew v. Precythe 3723:Bucklew v. Precythe 3697:Bucklew v. Precythe 3670:Bucklew v. Precythe 3435:Congressional Globe 2944:Schwartz, Bernard. 2873:Virginia Law Review 2819:Harmelin v Michigan 2798:Litigating Morality 2432:Helling v. McKinney 2187:Bucklew v. Precythe 1850:Bucklew v. Precythe 1650:public intoxication 1471:Chambers v. Florida 1345:Bucklew v. Precythe 1228:'s opinion for the 565:apply to the states 449:Politics portal 400:Amendments XI–XXVII 7282:William Livingston 7266:Alexander Hamilton 7072:Criminal procedure 7067:Constitutional law 7002:Foreign Emoluments 6966:State of the Union 6951:Self-Incrimination 6941:Recess appointment 6734:Compulsory Process 6396:Titles of Nobility 5927:Payne v. Tennessee 5852:Ingraham v. Wright 5807:Madison v. Alabama 5679:Atkins v. Virginia 5671:Herrera v. Collins 5599:Ford v. Wainwright 5575:Glass v. Louisiana 5543:Godfrey v. Georgia 5420:Lockyer v. Andrade 5260:Epstein, Richard. 5174:Stinneford writes: 4987:Stinneford, John. 4794:The New York Times 4719:The New York Times 4671:Cornell University 4667:Cornell Law School 4629:The New York Times 4592:on August 20, 2020 4584:Lockyer v. Andrade 4561:on August 20, 2020 4549:Lockyer v. Andrade 4527:on August 20, 2020 4519:Lockyer v. Andrade 4504:Lockyer v. Andrade 4485:on August 19, 2020 4447:on August 19, 2020 4404:on August 18, 2020 4290:on August 18, 2020 4054:The New York Times 3870:(Fifth ed.). 3640:Cornell Law School 3568:Cornell University 3564:Cornell Law School 3396:Ingraham v. Wright 3370:Ingraham v. Wright 3178:on August 12, 2019 2986:on October 7, 2023 2738:Ingraham v. Wright 2205:Due Process Clause 2177:Callins v. Collins 2173:concurring opinion 2099:Lockyer v. Andrade 2001:Herrera v. Collins 1947:Godfrey v. Georgia 1896:unconstitutional. 1859:Due Process Clause 1840:Callins v. Collins 1836:concurring opinion 1656:on the basis that 1652:by distinguishing 1515:Atkins v. Virginia 1421:William O. Douglas 1350:Due Process Clause 1335:Callins v. Collins 1331:concurring opinion 1127:Ingraham v. Wright 1110:federal government 1074:Due Process Clause 893:due process of law 688:William Blackstone 547:capital punishment 504: 493: 311:D.C. Voting Rights 289:Titles of Nobility 7642: 7641: 7636: 7635: 7602:Constitution Week 7587:Independence Mall 7575:National Archives 7533: 7532: 7348:Gouverneur Morris 7333:Thomas Fitzsimons 7313:Benjamin Franklin 7187:George Washington 7087:Enumerated powers 7062:Concurrent powers 7057:Balance of powers 6886:No Religious Test 6826:Freedom of Speech 6617:Independence Hall 6540: 6539: 6444:Bricker amendment 6377: 6376: 6090: 6089: 6086: 6085: 6082: 6081: 5981: 5980: 5977: 5976: 5943:Farmer v. Brennan 5911:Estelle v. Gamble 5836:Jackson v. Bishop 5727:Hill v. McDonough 5695:Tennard v. Dretke 5663:Walton v. Arizona 5559:Enmund v. Florida 5503:Furman v. Georgia 5479:Wilkerson v. Utah 5436:Miller v. Alabama 5428:Graham v. Florida 5388:Rummel v. Estelle 5222:John D. Bessler, 5198:Bessler, John D. 5134:Enmund v. Florida 5119:Enmund v. Florida 5077:Jackson v. Bishop 5064:Jackson v. Bishop 4702:Archived version. 4388:Rummel v. Estelle 4312:Rummel v. Estelle 4282:Rummel v. Estelle 4267:Rummel v. Estelle 4224:Wilkerson v. Utah 4164:Million, Joelle. 4045:Greenhouse, Linda 3995:Miller v. Alabama 3885:978-1-4224-2987-7 3599:Miller v. Alabama 3502:on April 28, 2003 3441:Furman v. Georgia 3312:on August 7, 2022 2965:, page 84 (2004). 2959:Patterson, John. 2879:(4): 899, 926–61. 2846:Claus, Laurence. 2769: (1972); and 2755:Furman v. Georgia 2546:public dissection 2501:Wilkerson v. Utah 2440:Farmer v. Brennan 2424:Estelle v. Gamble 2332:Enmund v. Florida 2289:Jackson v. Bishop 2158:lethal injections 2115:three strikes law 2070:three strikes law 2054:Rummel v. Estelle 2030:Wilkerson v. Utah 1981:Walton v. Arizona 1888:Furman v. Georgia 1872:Furman v. Georgia 1745:Miller v. Alabama 1731:Graham v. Florida 1686:life imprisonment 1389:Wilkerson v. Utah 1370:According to the 1319:Miller v. Alabama 1297:Furman v. Georgia 1248:Furman v. Georgia 1138:Estelle v. Gamble 1045:Rummel v. Estelle 1043:, supra, at 288; 792:Petition of Right 713:of 1776, and the 501:National Archives 485: 484: 16:(Redirected from 7682: 7483:Charles Pinckney 7292:William Paterson 7224:Nathaniel Gorham 7177: 7176: 6956:Speech or Debate 6784:Equal Protection 6494:Ludlow amendment 6479:Flag Desecration 6474:Federal Marriage 6439:Blaine amendment 6401:Corwin Amendment 6192: 6191: 6188: 6187: 6117: 6110: 6103: 6094: 6093: 6064:Timbs v. Indiana 5998: 5997: 5987: 5986: 5959:Kahler v. Kansas 5844:Gates v. Collier 5783:Hurst v. Florida 5775:Glossip v. Gross 5703:Roper v. Simmons 5639:Penry v. Lynaugh 5607:Tison v. Arizona 5567:Pulley v. Harris 5527:Coker v. Georgia 5519:Gregg v. Georgia 5361: 5360: 5350: 5349: 5334: 5327: 5320: 5311: 5310: 5298: 5297: 5269: 5258: 5252: 5233: 5227: 5220: 5214: 5196: 5190: 5180:Justice Scalia's 5173: 5171: 5169: 5154: 5148: 5147: 5145: 5143: 5128: 5122: 5116: 5110: 5104: 5098: 5094: 5088: 5082: 5073: 5067: 5061: 5055: 5054: 5052: 5050: 5045:on March 8, 2016 5041:. Archived from 5002: 4996: 4985: 4979: 4978: 4973:. Archived from 4962: 4956: 4955: 4953: 4951: 4934:Forte, David F. 4931: 4922: 4921: 4919: 4917: 4902: 4896: 4895: 4889: 4877: 4868: 4867: 4865: 4863: 4848: 4842: 4841: 4839: 4837: 4817: 4811: 4810: 4808: 4806: 4801:on July 15, 2020 4797:. Archived from 4784: 4778: 4772: 4766: 4765: 4763: 4761: 4741: 4735: 4734: 4732: 4730: 4721:. Archived from 4710: 4704: 4697:Glossip v. Gross 4693: 4687: 4686: 4684: 4682: 4651: 4645: 4644: 4642: 4640: 4631:. Archived from 4620: 4614: 4608: 4602: 4601: 4599: 4597: 4577: 4571: 4570: 4568: 4566: 4543: 4537: 4536: 4534: 4532: 4513: 4507: 4501: 4495: 4494: 4492: 4490: 4481:. Archived from 4463: 4457: 4456: 4454: 4452: 4433: 4427: 4421: 4415: 4413: 4411: 4409: 4381: 4375: 4374: 4359: 4353: 4351: 4349: 4347: 4341: 4335:. Archived from 4318: 4306: 4300: 4299: 4297: 4295: 4276: 4270: 4264: 4258: 4257: 4255: 4248: 4233: 4227: 4221: 4215: 4192: 4186: 4177: 4171: 4162: 4156: 4155: 4153: 4151: 4146:on April 3, 2019 4142:. Archived from 4131: 4125: 4124: 4122: 4120: 4105: 4099: 4098: 4096: 4094: 4088: 4081: 4072: 4066: 4065: 4063: 4061: 4047:(July 2, 2008). 4041: 4035: 4034: 4032: 4030: 4015: 4009: 4008: 4006: 4004: 3989: 3983: 3982: 3980: 3978: 3961: 3955: 3954: 3952: 3950: 3935: 3929: 3911: 3905: 3898:Miller, Wilbur. 3896: 3890: 3889: 3859: 3853: 3833: 3827: 3820:Finkel, Norman. 3818: 3812: 3803: 3797: 3796: 3794: 3792: 3777: 3771: 3770: 3768: 3766: 3755: 3749: 3743: 3737: 3736: 3734: 3732: 3717: 3711: 3710: 3708: 3706: 3691: 3685: 3667: 3656: 3655: 3653: 3651: 3646:on June 12, 2024 3642:. Archived from 3624: 3613: 3612: 3610: 3608: 3593: 3584: 3583: 3581: 3579: 3574:on July 13, 2020 3570:. Archived from 3547: 3538: 3537: 3535: 3533: 3524:Gregg v. Georgia 3518: 3512: 3511: 3509: 3507: 3498:. Archived from 3491: 3485: 3431: 3425: 3418:Federman, Cary. 3416: 3410: 3409: 3407: 3405: 3390: 3384: 3383: 3381: 3379: 3364: 3358: 3357: 3355: 3353: 3333: 3322: 3321: 3319: 3317: 3302: 3296: 3295: 3293: 3291: 3276: 3270: 3269: 3267: 3265: 3246: 3240: 3231: 3225: 3219: 3213: 3212: 3210: 3208: 3194: 3188: 3187: 3185: 3183: 3168: 3162: 3156: 3150: 3149: 3147: 3145: 3130: 3124: 3123: 3121: 3119: 3106:David F. Forte. 3103: 3094: 3088: 3082: 3081: 3079: 3077: 3071: 3064: 3058:Timbs v. Indiana 3052: 3046: 3043:Timbs v. Indiana 3040: 3034: 3033: 3031: 3029: 3020:Coker v. Georgia 3014: 3008: 3005:Coker v. Georgia 3002: 2996: 2995: 2993: 2991: 2972: 2966: 2957: 2951: 2942: 2933: 2924: 2918: 2911:Donelson, Raff. 2909: 2903: 2880: 2864: 2855: 2854:, Vol. 28 (2004) 2844: 2833: 2808: 2802: 2793: 2787: 2716: 2710: 2709: 2707: 2705: 2689: 2683: 2682: 2680: 2668: 2662: 2661: 2655: 2647: 2645: 2643: 2638:on July 15, 2020 2634:. Archived from 2622: 2611: 2610: 2608: 2606: 2595: 2578: 2534:embowelled alive 2475: 2418:Michelle Kosilek 2365:Thomas Jefferson 2323: (1892) and 2309: 2303: 2299: 2143:Glossip v. Gross 2018: 1916: (1976). In 1902:Gregg v. Georgia 1770:Coker v. Georgia 1498:Roper v. Simmons 1366:Specific aspects 1348:(2019) that the 1065:Timbs v. Indiana 1057:Timbs v. Indiana 1038: 1030: 988:asset forfeiture 845:Schilb v. Kuebel 756:Timbs v. Indiana 750:Coker v. Georgia 704: 676: 663:King William III 630: 593: 508:Eighth Amendment 477: 470: 463: 447: 446: 435: 434: 423: 422: 421: 57: 32: 31: 21: 7690: 7689: 7685: 7684: 7683: 7681: 7680: 7679: 7645: 7644: 7643: 7638: 7637: 7632: 7567: 7561: 7529: 7525:William Jackson 7513: 7509:Abraham Baldwin 7492: 7461: 7457:Hugh Williamson 7435: 7414: 7388: 7379:Richard Bassett 7352: 7338:Jared Ingersoll 7301: 7297:Jonathan Dayton 7270: 7254: 7233: 7212: 7208:Nicholas Gilman 7191: 7166: 7132:Reserved powers 7112:Judicial review 7045: 6841:General Welfare 6764:Double Jeopardy 6675: 6602:List of Framers 6582:New Jersey Plan 6536: 6518: 6514:Victims' Rights 6434:Balanced budget 6420: 6373: 6302: 6274: 6253: 6177: 6126: 6121: 6091: 6078: 6025: 5992: 5973: 5903:Powell v. Texas 5874: 5847:(5th Cir. 1974) 5839:(8th Cir. 1968) 5827: 5821: 5767:Hall v. Florida 5735:Kansas v. Marsh 5719:Oregon v. Guzek 5714:(5th Cir. 2005) 5711:Bigby v. Dretke 5687:Ring v. Arizona 5535:Lockett v. Ohio 5466: 5355: 5344: 5338: 5303: 5291:Wayback Machine 5278: 5273: 5272: 5259: 5255: 5234: 5230: 5221: 5217: 5207:Wayback Machine 5197: 5193: 5167: 5165: 5155: 5151: 5141: 5139: 5130: 5129: 5125: 5117: 5113: 5105: 5101: 5095:Neil v. Vermont 5092: 5089: 5085: 5074: 5070: 5062: 5058: 5048: 5046: 5003: 4999: 4986: 4982: 4963: 4959: 4949: 4947: 4932: 4925: 4915: 4913: 4904: 4903: 4899: 4887: 4879: 4878: 4871: 4861: 4859: 4850: 4849: 4845: 4835: 4833: 4818: 4814: 4804: 4802: 4785: 4781: 4773: 4769: 4759: 4757: 4742: 4738: 4728: 4726: 4725:on May 27, 2020 4711: 4707: 4694: 4690: 4680: 4678: 4677:on May 29, 2020 4653: 4652: 4648: 4638: 4636: 4621: 4617: 4609: 4605: 4595: 4593: 4578: 4574: 4564: 4562: 4545: 4544: 4540: 4530: 4528: 4515: 4514: 4510: 4502: 4498: 4488: 4486: 4465: 4464: 4460: 4450: 4448: 4435: 4434: 4430: 4422: 4418: 4407: 4405: 4382: 4378: 4361: 4360: 4356: 4345: 4343: 4339: 4316: 4308: 4307: 4303: 4293: 4291: 4278: 4277: 4273: 4265: 4261: 4253: 4246: 4234: 4230: 4222: 4218: 4200:Ring v. Arizona 4193: 4189: 4179:Palmer, Louis. 4178: 4174: 4163: 4159: 4149: 4147: 4132: 4128: 4118: 4116: 4107: 4106: 4102: 4092: 4090: 4089:on July 2, 2018 4086: 4079: 4073: 4069: 4059: 4057: 4042: 4038: 4028: 4026: 4016: 4012: 4002: 4000: 3991: 3990: 3986: 3976: 3974: 3962: 3958: 3948: 3946: 3936: 3932: 3922:Wayback Machine 3913:Ryan, Meghan. " 3912: 3908: 3897: 3893: 3886: 3860: 3856: 3834: 3830: 3819: 3815: 3804: 3800: 3790: 3788: 3779: 3778: 3774: 3764: 3762: 3757: 3756: 3752: 3744: 3740: 3730: 3728: 3719: 3718: 3714: 3704: 3702: 3693: 3692: 3688: 3668: 3659: 3649: 3647: 3625: 3616: 3606: 3604: 3595: 3594: 3587: 3577: 3575: 3548: 3541: 3531: 3529: 3520: 3519: 3515: 3505: 3503: 3492: 3488: 3432: 3428: 3417: 3413: 3403: 3401: 3392: 3391: 3387: 3377: 3375: 3366: 3365: 3361: 3351: 3349: 3334: 3325: 3315: 3313: 3304: 3303: 3299: 3289: 3287: 3278: 3277: 3273: 3263: 3261: 3247: 3243: 3232: 3228: 3220: 3216: 3206: 3204: 3196: 3195: 3191: 3181: 3179: 3170: 3169: 3165: 3157: 3153: 3143: 3141: 3132: 3131: 3127: 3117: 3115: 3104: 3097: 3089: 3085: 3075: 3073: 3069: 3062: 3054: 3053: 3049: 3041: 3037: 3027: 3025: 3016: 3015: 3011: 3003: 2999: 2989: 2987: 2974: 2973: 2969: 2958: 2954: 2943: 2936: 2925: 2921: 2910: 2906: 2865: 2858: 2845: 2836: 2811:Chitty, Joseph. 2809: 2805: 2795:Bartee, Alice. 2794: 2790: 2717: 2713: 2703: 2701: 2691: 2690: 2686: 2678: 2669: 2665: 2649: 2648: 2641: 2639: 2623: 2614: 2604: 2602: 2597: 2596: 2592: 2582: 2581: 2562: 2561: 2548:in murder, and 2476: 2472: 2462: 2391: 2382:Richard Epstein 2361:Cesare Beccaria 2310:Neil v. Vermont 2307: 2301: 2297: 2283: 2277: 2275:Proportionality 2254:, like Justice 2218: 2181:Fifth Amendment 2160:using the drug 2025: 2016: 1844:Fifth Amendment 1828: 1765: 1634:Powell v. Texas 1564:cadena temporal 1560:judicial review 1539: 1384: 1368: 1339:Fifth Amendment 1264:Justice Brennan 1094: 1088: 1086:General aspects 1083: 1060: 1036: 1028: 999: 968: 924: 872: 865: 863:Excessive fines 779: 773: 745: 743:General aspects 702: 674: 628: 613: 608: 603: 602: 601: 599: 594: 573: 481: 441: 429: 419: 417: 371: 315: 271: 270: 114: 46: 28: 23: 22: 18:Excessive fines 15: 12: 11: 5: 7688: 7678: 7677: 7672: 7667: 7662: 7657: 7640: 7639: 7634: 7633: 7631: 7630: 7625: 7617: 7609: 7604: 7599: 7594: 7589: 7584: 7583: 7582: 7571: 7569: 7563: 7562: 7560: 7559: 7554: 7549: 7541: 7539: 7535: 7534: 7531: 7530: 7528: 7527: 7521: 7519: 7515: 7514: 7512: 7511: 7506: 7500: 7498: 7494: 7493: 7491: 7490: 7485: 7480: 7475: 7469: 7467: 7466:South Carolina 7463: 7462: 7460: 7459: 7454: 7449: 7447:William Blount 7443: 7441: 7440:North Carolina 7437: 7436: 7434: 7433: 7428: 7422: 7420: 7416: 7415: 7413: 7412: 7410:Daniel Carroll 7407: 7402: 7396: 7394: 7390: 7389: 7387: 7386: 7381: 7376: 7374:John Dickinson 7371: 7366: 7360: 7358: 7354: 7353: 7351: 7350: 7345: 7340: 7335: 7330: 7325: 7320: 7318:Thomas Mifflin 7315: 7309: 7307: 7303: 7302: 7300: 7299: 7294: 7289: 7287:David Brearley 7284: 7278: 7276: 7272: 7271: 7269: 7268: 7262: 7260: 7256: 7255: 7253: 7252: 7247: 7241: 7239: 7235: 7234: 7232: 7231: 7226: 7220: 7218: 7214: 7213: 7211: 7210: 7205: 7199: 7197: 7193: 7192: 7190: 7189: 7183: 7181: 7174: 7168: 7167: 7165: 7164: 7159: 7157:Taxation power 7154: 7149: 7144: 7139: 7134: 7129: 7124: 7119: 7114: 7109: 7104: 7102:Implied powers 7099: 7094: 7089: 7084: 7079: 7074: 7069: 7064: 7059: 7053: 7051: 7050:Interpretation 7047: 7046: 7044: 7043: 7038: 7033: 7015: 7010: 7005: 6998: 6993: 6988: 6983: 6978: 6973: 6968: 6963: 6958: 6953: 6948: 6946:Recommendation 6943: 6938: 6933: 6928: 6923: 6918: 6913: 6908: 6903: 6898: 6893: 6888: 6883: 6878: 6873: 6868: 6863: 6858: 6853: 6848: 6843: 6838: 6833: 6831:Fugitive Slave 6828: 6823: 6818: 6813: 6808: 6801: 6799:Excessive Bail 6796: 6791: 6786: 6781: 6776: 6771: 6766: 6761: 6756: 6751: 6746: 6741: 6736: 6731: 6726: 6721: 6716: 6711: 6706: 6701: 6699:Appropriations 6696: 6691: 6685: 6683: 6677: 6676: 6674: 6673: 6668: 6663: 6658: 6653: 6648: 6643: 6638: 6633: 6626: 6625: 6624: 6619: 6614: 6609: 6604: 6599: 6594: 6589: 6584: 6579: 6569: 6564: 6559: 6554: 6548: 6546: 6542: 6541: 6538: 6537: 6535: 6534: 6529: 6523: 6520: 6519: 6517: 6516: 6511: 6509:Single subject 6506: 6501: 6496: 6491: 6486: 6481: 6476: 6471: 6466: 6461: 6456: 6451: 6446: 6441: 6436: 6430: 6428: 6422: 6421: 6419: 6418: 6413: 6408: 6403: 6398: 6393: 6387: 6385: 6379: 6378: 6375: 6374: 6372: 6371: 6366: 6361: 6356: 6351: 6346: 6341: 6336: 6331: 6326: 6321: 6316: 6310: 6308: 6304: 6303: 6301: 6300: 6295: 6290: 6284: 6282: 6280:Reconstruction 6276: 6275: 6273: 6272: 6267: 6261: 6259: 6255: 6254: 6252: 6251: 6246: 6241: 6236: 6231: 6226: 6221: 6216: 6211: 6206: 6200: 6198: 6196:Bill of Rights 6185: 6179: 6178: 6176: 6175: 6170: 6165: 6160: 6155: 6150: 6145: 6140: 6134: 6132: 6128: 6127: 6120: 6119: 6112: 6105: 6097: 6088: 6087: 6084: 6083: 6080: 6079: 6077: 6076: 6068: 6060: 6052: 6044: 6035: 6033: 6027: 6026: 6024: 6023: 6015: 6011:Stack v. Boyle 6006: 6004: 5994: 5993: 5983: 5982: 5979: 5978: 5975: 5974: 5972: 5971: 5963: 5955: 5951:Brown v. Plata 5947: 5939: 5931: 5923: 5915: 5907: 5899: 5891: 5887:Trop v. Dulles 5882: 5880: 5876: 5875: 5873: 5872: 5868:Hope v. Pelzer 5864: 5856: 5848: 5840: 5831: 5829: 5823: 5822: 5820: 5819: 5811: 5803: 5799:Moore v. Texas 5795: 5791:Kansas v. Carr 5787: 5779: 5771: 5763: 5755: 5747: 5739: 5731: 5723: 5715: 5707: 5699: 5691: 5683: 5675: 5667: 5659: 5651: 5643: 5635: 5627: 5619: 5611: 5603: 5595: 5587: 5579: 5571: 5563: 5555: 5547: 5539: 5531: 5523: 5515: 5507: 5499: 5491: 5483: 5474: 5472: 5468: 5467: 5465: 5464: 5456: 5448: 5440: 5432: 5424: 5416: 5408: 5400: 5392: 5384: 5376: 5367: 5365: 5357: 5356: 5346: 5345: 5337: 5336: 5329: 5322: 5314: 5308: 5305: 5304: 5295: 5294: 5277: 5276:External links 5274: 5271: 5270: 5266:Defining Ideas 5253: 5228: 5215: 5191: 5149: 5123: 5111: 5099: 5083: 5068: 5056: 4997: 4980: 4957: 4923: 4897: 4869: 4843: 4812: 4779: 4767: 4736: 4705: 4688: 4646: 4615: 4603: 4572: 4538: 4508: 4496: 4458: 4428: 4416: 4376: 4354: 4301: 4271: 4259: 4228: 4216: 4187: 4172: 4157: 4126: 4100: 4067: 4036: 4024:New York Times 4010: 3984: 3956: 3930: 3906: 3891: 3884: 3854: 3828: 3813: 3798: 3772: 3750: 3738: 3712: 3686: 3657: 3628:Antonin Scalia 3614: 3585: 3539: 3513: 3486: 3426: 3411: 3385: 3359: 3323: 3297: 3271: 3241: 3234:18 U.S.C. 3226: 3214: 3189: 3163: 3151: 3136:Stack v. Boyle 3125: 3095: 3091:Stack v. Boyle 3083: 3047: 3035: 3009: 2997: 2967: 2952: 2934: 2919: 2904: 2856: 2834: 2803: 2788: 2711: 2684: 2663: 2612: 2589: 2588: 2580: 2579: 2469: 2468: 2461: 2458: 2457: 2456: 2455: 2454: 2449: 2444: 2436: 2428: 2420: 2415: 2407: 2402: 2397: 2390: 2387: 2359:", written by 2294:Eighth Circuit 2276: 2273: 2256:Antonin Scalia 2223:Trop v. Dulles 2217: 2214: 2169:Antonin Scalia 2024: 2021: 1832:Antonin Scalia 1827: 1824: 1764: 1761: 1618:to the use of 1576:Trop v. Dulles 1538: 1535: 1423:stated in his 1417:disembowelment 1383: 1380: 1367: 1364: 1327:Antonin Scalia 1302:Trop v. Dulles 1285: 1284: 1281: 1278: 1275: 1226:Potter Stewart 1142:Trop v. Dulles 1090:Main article: 1087: 1084: 1082: 1079: 1059: 1054: 998: 993: 967: 962: 923: 918: 871: 866: 864: 861: 826:Stack v. Boyle 775:Main article: 772: 771:Excessive bail 769: 744: 741: 617:Bill of Rights 612: 609: 607: 604: 596: 595: 588: 587: 586: 577:Excessive bail 572: 569: 520:excessive bail 512:Amendment VIII 483: 482: 480: 479: 472: 465: 457: 454: 453: 452: 451: 439: 437:Law portal 427: 412: 411: 410: 409: 403: 402: 396: 395: 393:Amendments I–X 389: 388: 380: 379: 373: 372: 370: 369: 364: 362:Bill of Rights 358: 357: 352: 346: 345: 340: 334: 333: 327: 324: 323: 317: 316: 314: 313: 308: 302: 301: 296: 291: 285: 284: 278: 269: 268: 263: 258: 253: 248: 242: 241: 236: 231: 226: 221: 215: 214: 209: 204: 199: 194: 189: 184: 178: 177: 172: 167: 162: 157: 152: 147: 142: 137: 132: 126: 123: 122: 116: 115: 113: 112: 107: 102: 97: 92: 87: 82: 76: 75: 74: 66: 65: 59: 58: 50: 49: 41: 40: 26: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 7687: 7676: 7673: 7671: 7668: 7666: 7663: 7661: 7658: 7656: 7653: 7652: 7650: 7629: 7626: 7623: 7622: 7618: 7615: 7614: 7610: 7608: 7605: 7603: 7600: 7598: 7595: 7593: 7590: 7588: 7585: 7581: 7578: 7577: 7576: 7573: 7572: 7570: 7564: 7558: 7555: 7553: 7552:Jacob Shallus 7550: 7548: 7547: 7543: 7542: 7540: 7536: 7526: 7523: 7522: 7520: 7516: 7510: 7507: 7505: 7502: 7501: 7499: 7495: 7489: 7488:Pierce Butler 7486: 7484: 7481: 7479: 7476: 7474: 7473:John Rutledge 7471: 7470: 7468: 7464: 7458: 7455: 7453: 7450: 7448: 7445: 7444: 7442: 7438: 7432: 7431:James Madison 7429: 7427: 7424: 7423: 7421: 7417: 7411: 7408: 7406: 7403: 7401: 7400:James McHenry 7398: 7397: 7395: 7391: 7385: 7382: 7380: 7377: 7375: 7372: 7370: 7367: 7365: 7362: 7361: 7359: 7355: 7349: 7346: 7344: 7341: 7339: 7336: 7334: 7331: 7329: 7328:George Clymer 7326: 7324: 7323:Robert Morris 7321: 7319: 7316: 7314: 7311: 7310: 7308: 7304: 7298: 7295: 7293: 7290: 7288: 7285: 7283: 7280: 7279: 7277: 7273: 7267: 7264: 7263: 7261: 7257: 7251: 7250:Roger Sherman 7248: 7246: 7243: 7242: 7240: 7236: 7230: 7227: 7225: 7222: 7221: 7219: 7217:Massachusetts 7215: 7209: 7206: 7204: 7201: 7200: 7198: 7196:New Hampshire 7194: 7188: 7185: 7184: 7182: 7178: 7175: 7173: 7169: 7163: 7160: 7158: 7155: 7153: 7150: 7148: 7145: 7143: 7140: 7138: 7135: 7133: 7130: 7128: 7125: 7123: 7122:Plenary power 7120: 7118: 7115: 7113: 7110: 7108: 7105: 7103: 7100: 7098: 7095: 7093: 7092:Equal footing 7090: 7088: 7085: 7083: 7080: 7078: 7075: 7073: 7070: 7068: 7065: 7063: 7060: 7058: 7055: 7054: 7052: 7048: 7042: 7039: 7037: 7034: 7031: 7027: 7023: 7019: 7016: 7014: 7013:Trial by Jury 7011: 7009: 7006: 7003: 6999: 6997: 6994: 6992: 6989: 6987: 6984: 6982: 6979: 6977: 6974: 6972: 6969: 6967: 6964: 6962: 6959: 6957: 6954: 6952: 6949: 6947: 6944: 6942: 6939: 6937: 6934: 6932: 6929: 6927: 6924: 6922: 6919: 6917: 6914: 6912: 6909: 6907: 6904: 6902: 6899: 6897: 6894: 6892: 6889: 6887: 6884: 6882: 6879: 6877: 6874: 6872: 6869: 6867: 6866:Ineligibility 6864: 6862: 6861:Import-Export 6859: 6857: 6854: 6852: 6849: 6847: 6844: 6842: 6839: 6837: 6834: 6832: 6829: 6827: 6824: 6822: 6819: 6817: 6816:Free Exercise 6814: 6812: 6809: 6807: 6806: 6805:Ex Post Facto 6802: 6800: 6797: 6795: 6792: 6790: 6789:Establishment 6787: 6785: 6782: 6780: 6777: 6775: 6772: 6770: 6767: 6765: 6762: 6760: 6757: 6755: 6752: 6750: 6747: 6745: 6742: 6740: 6739:Confrontation 6737: 6735: 6732: 6730: 6727: 6725: 6722: 6720: 6717: 6715: 6712: 6710: 6707: 6705: 6702: 6700: 6697: 6695: 6692: 6690: 6687: 6686: 6684: 6682: 6678: 6672: 6669: 6667: 6664: 6662: 6659: 6657: 6654: 6652: 6649: 6647: 6644: 6642: 6639: 6637: 6634: 6632: 6631: 6627: 6623: 6622:Syng inkstand 6620: 6618: 6615: 6613: 6610: 6608: 6605: 6603: 6600: 6598: 6595: 6593: 6590: 6588: 6585: 6583: 6580: 6578: 6577:Virginia Plan 6575: 6574: 6573: 6570: 6568: 6565: 6563: 6560: 6558: 6555: 6553: 6550: 6549: 6547: 6543: 6533: 6530: 6528: 6525: 6524: 6521: 6515: 6512: 6510: 6507: 6505: 6504:School Prayer 6502: 6500: 6497: 6495: 6492: 6490: 6487: 6485: 6482: 6480: 6477: 6475: 6472: 6470: 6467: 6465: 6462: 6460: 6457: 6455: 6452: 6450: 6447: 6445: 6442: 6440: 6437: 6435: 6432: 6431: 6429: 6427: 6423: 6417: 6414: 6412: 6409: 6407: 6404: 6402: 6399: 6397: 6394: 6392: 6389: 6388: 6386: 6384: 6380: 6370: 6367: 6365: 6362: 6360: 6357: 6355: 6352: 6350: 6347: 6345: 6342: 6340: 6337: 6335: 6332: 6330: 6327: 6325: 6322: 6320: 6317: 6315: 6312: 6311: 6309: 6305: 6299: 6296: 6294: 6291: 6289: 6286: 6285: 6283: 6281: 6277: 6271: 6268: 6266: 6263: 6262: 6260: 6256: 6250: 6247: 6245: 6242: 6240: 6237: 6235: 6232: 6230: 6227: 6225: 6222: 6220: 6217: 6215: 6212: 6210: 6207: 6205: 6202: 6201: 6199: 6197: 6193: 6189: 6186: 6184: 6180: 6174: 6171: 6169: 6166: 6164: 6161: 6159: 6156: 6154: 6151: 6149: 6146: 6144: 6141: 6139: 6136: 6135: 6133: 6129: 6125: 6118: 6113: 6111: 6106: 6104: 6099: 6098: 6095: 6074: 6073: 6069: 6066: 6065: 6061: 6058: 6057: 6053: 6050: 6049: 6045: 6042: 6041: 6037: 6036: 6034: 6032: 6028: 6021: 6020: 6016: 6013: 6012: 6008: 6007: 6005: 6003: 5999: 5995: 5988: 5984: 5969: 5968: 5964: 5961: 5960: 5956: 5953: 5952: 5948: 5945: 5944: 5940: 5937: 5936: 5932: 5929: 5928: 5924: 5921: 5920: 5916: 5913: 5912: 5908: 5905: 5904: 5900: 5897: 5896: 5892: 5889: 5888: 5884: 5883: 5881: 5877: 5870: 5869: 5865: 5862: 5861: 5857: 5854: 5853: 5849: 5846: 5845: 5841: 5838: 5837: 5833: 5832: 5830: 5824: 5817: 5816: 5812: 5809: 5808: 5804: 5801: 5800: 5796: 5793: 5792: 5788: 5785: 5784: 5780: 5777: 5776: 5772: 5769: 5768: 5764: 5761: 5760: 5756: 5753: 5752: 5748: 5745: 5744: 5740: 5737: 5736: 5732: 5729: 5728: 5724: 5721: 5720: 5716: 5713: 5712: 5708: 5705: 5704: 5700: 5697: 5696: 5692: 5689: 5688: 5684: 5681: 5680: 5676: 5673: 5672: 5668: 5665: 5664: 5660: 5657: 5656: 5652: 5649: 5648: 5644: 5641: 5640: 5636: 5633: 5632: 5628: 5625: 5624: 5620: 5617: 5616: 5612: 5609: 5608: 5604: 5601: 5600: 5596: 5593: 5592: 5588: 5585: 5584: 5580: 5577: 5576: 5572: 5569: 5568: 5564: 5561: 5560: 5556: 5553: 5552: 5548: 5545: 5544: 5540: 5537: 5536: 5532: 5529: 5528: 5524: 5521: 5520: 5516: 5513: 5512: 5508: 5505: 5504: 5500: 5497: 5496: 5492: 5489: 5488: 5484: 5481: 5480: 5476: 5475: 5473: 5471:Death penalty 5469: 5462: 5461: 5457: 5454: 5453: 5449: 5446: 5445: 5441: 5438: 5437: 5433: 5430: 5429: 5425: 5422: 5421: 5417: 5414: 5413: 5409: 5406: 5405: 5401: 5398: 5397: 5396:Solem v. Helm 5393: 5390: 5389: 5385: 5382: 5381: 5377: 5374: 5373: 5369: 5368: 5366: 5364:Incarceration 5362: 5358: 5351: 5347: 5342: 5335: 5330: 5328: 5323: 5321: 5316: 5315: 5312: 5306: 5299: 5292: 5288: 5285: 5284: 5280: 5279: 5267: 5263: 5257: 5250: 5247: 5243: 5239: 5238: 5232: 5225: 5219: 5212: 5208: 5204: 5201: 5195: 5188: 5185: 5181: 5164: 5160: 5153: 5137: 5135: 5127: 5120: 5115: 5108: 5103: 5096: 5087: 5080: 5078: 5072: 5065: 5060: 5044: 5040: 5036: 5032: 5028: 5024: 5020: 5016: 5012: 5008: 5001: 4994: 4990: 4984: 4976: 4972: 4968: 4961: 4945: 4941: 4937: 4930: 4928: 4911: 4909: 4901: 4893: 4886: 4884: 4876: 4874: 4857: 4855: 4847: 4831: 4827: 4823: 4816: 4800: 4796: 4795: 4790: 4783: 4776: 4771: 4755: 4751: 4747: 4740: 4724: 4720: 4716: 4709: 4703: 4699: 4698: 4692: 4676: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4660: 4658: 4650: 4634: 4630: 4626: 4619: 4612: 4607: 4591: 4587: 4585: 4576: 4560: 4556: 4554: 4550: 4542: 4526: 4522: 4520: 4512: 4505: 4500: 4484: 4480: 4479:Bloomberg Law 4476: 4472: 4470: 4462: 4446: 4442: 4440: 4432: 4425: 4420: 4403: 4399: 4395: 4391: 4389: 4380: 4372: 4368: 4366: 4365:Solem v. Helm 4358: 4338: 4334: 4330: 4326: 4322: 4315: 4313: 4305: 4289: 4285: 4283: 4275: 4268: 4263: 4252: 4245: 4244: 4239: 4232: 4225: 4220: 4213: 4210: 4206: 4202: 4201: 4196: 4191: 4184: 4183: 4176: 4169: 4168: 4161: 4145: 4141: 4137: 4130: 4114: 4112: 4104: 4085: 4078: 4071: 4056: 4055: 4050: 4046: 4040: 4025: 4021: 4014: 3998: 3996: 3988: 3973: 3972: 3967: 3960: 3945: 3941: 3934: 3927: 3923: 3919: 3916: 3910: 3903: 3902: 3895: 3887: 3881: 3877: 3873: 3869: 3865: 3858: 3851: 3848: 3844: 3840: 3839: 3832: 3825: 3824: 3817: 3810: 3809: 3802: 3786: 3784: 3776: 3760: 3754: 3748:, at 135–136. 3747: 3742: 3726: 3724: 3716: 3700: 3698: 3690: 3683: 3679: 3675: 3671: 3666: 3664: 3662: 3645: 3641: 3637: 3633: 3629: 3623: 3621: 3619: 3602: 3600: 3592: 3590: 3573: 3569: 3565: 3561: 3557: 3555: 3546: 3544: 3527: 3525: 3517: 3501: 3497: 3490: 3483: 3479: 3476: 3472: 3468: 3467: 3462: 3458: 3454: 3451: 3447: 3443: 3442: 3437: 3436: 3430: 3423: 3422: 3415: 3399: 3397: 3389: 3373: 3371: 3363: 3347: 3343: 3341: 3332: 3330: 3328: 3311: 3307: 3301: 3285: 3283: 3275: 3260: 3256: 3254: 3245: 3239: 3235: 3230: 3223: 3218: 3203: 3199: 3193: 3177: 3173: 3167: 3160: 3155: 3139: 3137: 3129: 3113: 3109: 3102: 3100: 3092: 3087: 3068: 3061: 3059: 3051: 3044: 3039: 3023: 3021: 3013: 3006: 3001: 2985: 2981: 2977: 2971: 2964: 2963: 2956: 2949: 2948: 2941: 2939: 2931: 2930: 2923: 2916: 2915: 2908: 2902: 2900: 2899: 2892: 2890: 2889: 2878: 2874: 2870: 2863: 2861: 2853: 2849: 2843: 2841: 2839: 2831: 2828: 2824: 2821: 2820: 2815: 2812: 2807: 2800: 2799: 2792: 2785: 2782: 2778: 2774: 2773: 2768: 2765: 2761: 2757: 2756: 2752: (1977); 2751: 2748: 2744: 2740: 2739: 2735: (1991); 2734: 2731: 2727: 2723: 2722: 2715: 2700: 2699: 2694: 2688: 2677: 2673: 2667: 2659: 2653: 2637: 2633: 2629: 2621: 2619: 2617: 2600: 2594: 2590: 2587: 2586: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2567: 2566:In re Kemmler 2559: 2555: 2551: 2550:burning alive 2547: 2543: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2523: 2519: 2515: 2511: 2507: 2503: 2502: 2497: 2493: 2490: 2486: 2482: 2481: 2474: 2470: 2467: 2466: 2453: 2450: 2448: 2445: 2442: 2441: 2437: 2434: 2433: 2429: 2426: 2425: 2421: 2419: 2416: 2414: 2411: 2410: 2408: 2406: 2403: 2401: 2398: 2396: 2393: 2392: 2386: 2383: 2379: 2378: 2372: 2370: 2369:James Madison 2366: 2362: 2358: 2354: 2350: 2346: 2342: 2336: 2334: 2333: 2328: 2327: 2322: 2319: 2315: 2311: 2295: 2291: 2290: 2282: 2272: 2267: 2262: 2259: 2257: 2253: 2249: 2247: 2246: 2242:decency". In 2240: 2236: 2233: 2229: 2225: 2224: 2213: 2210: 2206: 2202: 2197: 2193: 2189: 2188: 2182: 2179:(1994): "The 2178: 2174: 2170: 2165: 2163: 2159: 2155: 2152: 2148: 2145: 2144: 2138: 2136: 2133: 2129: 2125: 2124: 2118: 2116: 2112: 2109: 2105: 2101: 2100: 2094: 2092: 2089: 2085: 2081: 2080: 2074: 2071: 2067: 2064: 2060: 2056: 2055: 2049: 2047: 2043: 2040: 2036: 2032: 2031: 2020: 2014: 2011: 2007: 2003: 2002: 1996: 1994: 1991: 1987: 1983: 1982: 1977: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1965: 1960: 1957: 1953: 1949: 1948: 1943: 1940: 1936: 1932: 1931: 1925: 1923: 1919: 1915: 1912: 1908: 1904: 1903: 1897: 1895: 1894: 1889: 1885: 1882: 1878: 1874: 1873: 1867: 1864: 1860: 1856: 1852: 1851: 1845: 1842:(1994): "The 1841: 1837: 1833: 1823: 1821: 1816: 1812: 1809: 1805: 1801: 1800: 1794: 1792: 1787: 1783: 1780: 1776: 1772: 1771: 1760: 1758: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1746: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1732: 1726: 1724: 1720: 1716: 1711: 1707: 1704: 1700: 1696: 1695: 1689: 1687: 1683: 1680: 1676: 1672: 1671: 1670:Solem v. Helm 1665: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1647: 1644: 1640: 1636: 1635: 1628: 1623: 1621: 1617: 1613: 1610: 1606: 1602: 1601: 1595: 1593: 1589: 1586: 1582: 1578: 1577: 1571: 1569: 1565: 1561: 1557: 1554: 1550: 1546: 1545: 1534: 1532: 1528: 1525: 1521: 1517: 1516: 1511: 1508: 1504: 1500: 1499: 1494: 1491: 1487: 1483: 1482: 1477: 1473: 1472: 1467: 1463: 1459: 1455: 1454:In re Kemmler 1451: 1447: 1443: 1439: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1427: 1422: 1418: 1414: 1413:burning alive 1410: 1406: 1402: 1399: 1395: 1391: 1390: 1379: 1377: 1373: 1372:Supreme Court 1363: 1360: 1355: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1340: 1337:(1994): "The 1336: 1332: 1328: 1323: 1321: 1320: 1315: 1312: 1308: 1304: 1303: 1298: 1293: 1289: 1282: 1279: 1276: 1273: 1269: 1268: 1267: 1265: 1262: (1972), 1261: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1249: 1242: 1237: 1235: 1231: 1227: 1222: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1209: 1205: 1201: 1200: 1195: 1191: 1187: 1186: 1181: 1178: 1174: 1170: 1169: 1163: 1161: 1159: 1153: 1151: 1145: 1143: 1139: 1133: 1129: 1128: 1122: 1120: 1116: 1111: 1107: 1103: 1102:Patrick Henry 1099: 1093: 1078: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1066: 1058: 1053: 1048: 1046: 1042: 1041:Solem v. Helm 1034: 1026: 1025:Solem v. Helm 1019: 1017: 1014: 1010: 1006: 1005: 997: 992: 989: 985: 982: 978: 975: 974: 966: 961: 960: (2003). 959: 956: 952: 948: 947: 942: 939: 935: 931: 930: 922: 917: 913: 908: 904: 902: 896: 894: 890: 887: 883: 879: 878: 870: 860: 858: 857: 852: 851: 846: 841: 839: 836: 832: 828: 827: 822: 819: 815: 811: 810: 804: 800: 798: 793: 788: 784: 778: 768: 766: 762: 758: 757: 752: 751: 740: 738: 737:James Madison 732: 727: 724: 723:Patrick Henry 720: 716: 712: 706: 697: 695: 694: 689: 683: 680: 672: 668: 667:Queen Mary II 665:and his wife 664: 659: 657: 656:death penalty 653: 652:jurisprudence 649: 645: 641: 640:King James II 637: 632: 626: 622: 618: 598: 592: 584: 582: 578: 568: 566: 562: 561: 554: 552: 548: 544: 543:Supreme Court 540: 535: 533: 529: 525: 521: 517: 513: 509: 502: 497: 489: 478: 473: 471: 466: 464: 459: 458: 456: 455: 450: 445: 440: 438: 433: 428: 426: 416: 415: 414: 413: 408: 405: 404: 401: 398: 397: 394: 391: 390: 387: 384: 383: 382: 381: 378: 375: 374: 368: 365: 363: 360: 359: 356: 355:Republicanism 353: 351: 348: 347: 344: 341: 339: 336: 335: 332: 329: 328: 326: 325: 322: 319: 318: 312: 309: 307: 304: 303: 300: 297: 295: 292: 290: 287: 286: 283: 280: 279: 276: 275: 267: 264: 262: 259: 257: 254: 252: 249: 247: 244: 243: 240: 237: 235: 232: 230: 227: 225: 222: 220: 217: 216: 213: 210: 208: 205: 203: 200: 198: 195: 193: 190: 188: 185: 183: 180: 179: 176: 173: 171: 168: 166: 163: 161: 158: 156: 153: 151: 148: 146: 143: 141: 138: 136: 133: 131: 128: 127: 125: 124: 121: 118: 117: 111: 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 96: 93: 91: 88: 86: 83: 81: 78: 77: 73: 70: 69: 68: 67: 64: 61: 60: 56: 52: 51: 48: 43: 42: 38: 34: 33: 30: 19: 7619: 7611: 7544: 7343:James Wilson 7306:Pennsylvania 7203:John Langdon 6961:Speedy Trial 6803: 6694:Appointments 6628: 6411:Equal Rights 6307:20th century 6238: 6070: 6062: 6054: 6046: 6038: 6017: 6009: 5965: 5957: 5949: 5941: 5933: 5925: 5917: 5909: 5901: 5893: 5885: 5866: 5858: 5850: 5842: 5834: 5813: 5805: 5797: 5789: 5781: 5773: 5765: 5757: 5751:Baze v. Rees 5749: 5741: 5733: 5725: 5717: 5709: 5701: 5693: 5685: 5677: 5669: 5661: 5653: 5645: 5637: 5629: 5621: 5613: 5605: 5597: 5589: 5581: 5573: 5565: 5557: 5554:(1981, 1984) 5549: 5541: 5533: 5525: 5517: 5509: 5501: 5493: 5485: 5477: 5458: 5450: 5442: 5434: 5426: 5418: 5410: 5402: 5394: 5386: 5378: 5370: 5340: 5282: 5265: 5256: 5235: 5231: 5223: 5218: 5210: 5194: 5176: 5166:. Retrieved 5152: 5142:December 22, 5140:. Retrieved 5133: 5126: 5118: 5114: 5106: 5102: 5090: 5086: 5076: 5071: 5063: 5059: 5047:. Retrieved 5043:the original 5014: 5010: 5000: 4992: 4983: 4975:the original 4960: 4948:. Retrieved 4914:. Retrieved 4907: 4900: 4892:the original 4882: 4862:December 12, 4860:. Retrieved 4853: 4846: 4834:. Retrieved 4825: 4815: 4803:. Retrieved 4799:the original 4792: 4782: 4774: 4770: 4758:. Retrieved 4749: 4739: 4727:. Retrieved 4723:the original 4718: 4708: 4696: 4691: 4679:. Retrieved 4675:the original 4657:Baze v. Rees 4656: 4649: 4637:. Retrieved 4633:the original 4628: 4618: 4611:Baze v. Rees 4610: 4606: 4594:. Retrieved 4590:the original 4583: 4575: 4563:. Retrieved 4559:the original 4552: 4548: 4541: 4529:. Retrieved 4525:the original 4518: 4511: 4503: 4499: 4487:. Retrieved 4483:the original 4474: 4468: 4461: 4449:. Retrieved 4445:the original 4438: 4431: 4423: 4419: 4406:. Retrieved 4402:the original 4397: 4393: 4387: 4379: 4370: 4364: 4357: 4344:. Retrieved 4337:the original 4324: 4320: 4311: 4304: 4292:. Retrieved 4288:the original 4281: 4274: 4266: 4262: 4251:the original 4242: 4237: 4231: 4223: 4219: 4198: 4194: 4190: 4180: 4175: 4165: 4160: 4148:. Retrieved 4144:the original 4129: 4119:December 12, 4117:. Retrieved 4110: 4103: 4091:. Retrieved 4084:the original 4070: 4058:. Retrieved 4052: 4039: 4027:. Retrieved 4023: 4013: 4003:December 12, 4001:. Retrieved 3994: 3987: 3975:. Retrieved 3969: 3959: 3947:. Retrieved 3933: 3925: 3909: 3899: 3894: 3867: 3857: 3852: (1991). 3836: 3831: 3821: 3816: 3806: 3801: 3789:. Retrieved 3782: 3775: 3763:. Retrieved 3753: 3745: 3741: 3729:. Retrieved 3722: 3715: 3705:December 12, 3703:. Retrieved 3696: 3689: 3669: 3648:. Retrieved 3644:the original 3605:. Retrieved 3598: 3576:. Retrieved 3572:the original 3554:Baze v. Rees 3553: 3530:. Retrieved 3523: 3516: 3504:. Retrieved 3500:the original 3489: 3481: 3464: 3439: 3433: 3429: 3419: 3414: 3404:September 3, 3402:. Retrieved 3395: 3388: 3378:September 3, 3376:. Retrieved 3369: 3362: 3350:. Retrieved 3346:the original 3339: 3316:February 20, 3314:. Retrieved 3310:the original 3300: 3288:. Retrieved 3281: 3274: 3264:February 11, 3262:. Retrieved 3252: 3244: 3229: 3221: 3217: 3205:. Retrieved 3201: 3192: 3180:. Retrieved 3176:the original 3166: 3158: 3154: 3142:. Retrieved 3135: 3128: 3116:. Retrieved 3090: 3086: 3076:December 21, 3074:. Retrieved 3067:the original 3057: 3050: 3042: 3038: 3026:. Retrieved 3019: 3012: 3004: 3000: 2988:. Retrieved 2984:the original 2979: 2970: 2960: 2955: 2945: 2929:Commentaries 2927: 2922: 2912: 2907: 2897: 2896: 2894: 2887: 2886: 2883: 2876: 2872: 2851: 2832: (1991). 2817: 2806: 2796: 2791: 2770: 2753: 2736: 2719: 2714: 2702:. Retrieved 2696: 2687: 2666: 2640:. Retrieved 2636:the original 2603:. Retrieved 2593: 2584: 2583: 2574: 2570: 2564: 2557: 2553: 2521: 2513: 2509: 2505: 2499: 2496:John Roberts 2480:Baze v. Rees 2478: 2473: 2464: 2463: 2438: 2430: 2422: 2375: 2373: 2353:John Bessler 2344: 2340: 2337: 2330: 2324: 2305: 2287: 2284: 2269: 2264: 2260: 2252:Originalists 2250: 2243: 2221: 2219: 2200: 2185: 2176: 2166: 2141: 2139: 2123:Baze v. Rees 2121: 2119: 2097: 2095: 2077: 2075: 2052: 2050: 2028: 2026: 1999: 1997: 1979: 1962: 1945: 1928: 1926: 1921: 1917: 1900: 1898: 1891: 1887: 1870: 1868: 1854: 1848: 1839: 1829: 1814: 1797: 1795: 1785: 1768: 1766: 1743: 1729: 1727: 1714: 1709: 1692: 1691:However, in 1690: 1668: 1666: 1661: 1657: 1653: 1632: 1631:However, in 1630: 1625: 1598: 1596: 1574: 1572: 1567: 1542: 1541:The case of 1540: 1513: 1496: 1479: 1469: 1453: 1424: 1387: 1385: 1369: 1358: 1343: 1334: 1324: 1317: 1300: 1296: 1294: 1290: 1286: 1246: 1244: 1239: 1234:John Bingham 1229: 1223: 1218: 1214: 1197: 1192:through the 1183: 1166: 1164: 1155: 1147: 1135: 1131: 1125: 1123: 1095: 1063: 1061: 1056: 1050: 1044: 1040: 1032: 1024: 1021: 1002: 1000: 995: 971: 969: 964: 944: 927: 925: 920: 915: 910: 906: 898: 875: 873: 868: 854: 849: 844: 842: 824: 807: 805: 801: 781:In England, 780: 754: 748: 746: 734: 729: 719:George Mason 708: 699: 691: 684: 679:King's Bench 660: 633: 614: 575: 558: 555: 536: 511: 507: 505: 306:Equal Rights 272: 164: 45:Constitution 29: 7504:William Few 7384:Jacob Broom 7364:George Read 7238:Connecticut 7172:Signatories 7022:Legislative 6996:Territorial 6916:Presentment 6901:Origination 6856:Impeachment 6811:Extradition 6779:Engagements 6769:Due Process 6719:Citizenship 6406:Child Labor 5828:or injuries 5514:(Cal. 1972) 4551:(01-1127), 4214: (2002) 4150:October 26, 3874:. pp. 3731:October 25, 3607:October 25, 3463:dissent in 3207:October 24, 3161:, at fn. 12 3028:October 30, 2885:the stake. 2786: (1910) 2355:points to " 2239:Earl Warren 2171:noted in a 1834:noted in a 1734:, 560 U.S. 1446:crucifixion 1362:disgrace." 1329:noted in a 1106:Inquisition 636:Titus Oates 623:, in which 299:Child Labor 7649:Categories 7616:(painting) 7568:and legacy 7426:John Blair 7275:New Jersey 7229:Rufus King 7127:Preemption 7041:War Powers 6976:Suspension 6794:Exceptions 6484:Human Life 6383:Unratified 6183:Amendments 5168:August 25, 4950:August 22, 4916:August 22, 4836:August 20, 4760:August 20, 4729:August 20, 4681:August 20, 4639:August 20, 4596:August 20, 4565:August 20, 4555:(01-1420)" 4531:August 20, 4489:August 19, 4451:August 19, 4408:August 18, 4346:August 18, 4294:August 18, 4029:August 25, 3944:SCOTUSblog 3872:LexisNexis 3864:"9.04 (B)" 3765:August 20, 3578:August 20, 3532:August 20, 3506:January 7, 3290:August 22, 3238:§ 982 3144:August 22, 2990:October 7, 2681:. gpo.gov. 2460:References 2279:See also: 1717:, Justice 1466:thumbscrew 1458:quartering 1409:dissection 1376:competence 1072:under the 787:Parliament 625:Parliament 611:Background 583:inflicted. 350:Federalism 338:Convention 7137:Saxbe fix 7026:Executive 6981:Take Care 6971:Supremacy 6846:Guarantee 6774:Elections 6545:Formation 6258:1795–1804 5031:144865297 3746:Wilkinson 2585:Citations 2542:quartered 2514:Wilkerson 2339:the word 2203:that the 2162:midazolam 1857:that the 1723:Rehnquist 1662:in public 1620:narcotics 1407:, public 1140:, supra; 690:entitled 514:) to the 377:Full text 7419:Virginia 7393:Maryland 7357:Delaware 7259:New York 7036:Vicinage 7030:Judicial 6754:Contract 6724:Commerce 6612:Printing 6426:Proposed 6138:Preamble 6131:Articles 5343:case law 5287:Archived 5203:Archived 5184:Thomas's 5049:July 19, 5017:(2): 3. 4944:Archived 4830:Archived 4805:July 15, 4754:Archived 4333:53060925 4093:April 7, 3918:Archived 3791:July 20, 3682:Archived 3650:June 12, 3352:July 19, 3182:April 1, 3159:McDonald 3118:April 1, 3112:Archived 2704:July 19, 2652:cite web 2642:July 18, 2538:beheaded 2389:See also 2167:Justice 1830:Justice 1715:Harmelin 1654:Robinson 1616:addicted 1462:the rack 1325:Justice 1230:Robinson 1224:Justice 1219:Robinson 1215:Robinson 1185:arguendo 1144:, supra; 1132:Ingraham 783:sheriffs 761:punitive 72:Preamble 37:a series 7566:Display 7538:Related 7497:Georgia 7018:Vesting 6986:Takings 6871:Militia 6729:Compact 6681:Clauses 6607:Signing 6552:History 5039:1300356 4665:of the 4371:Findlaw 4060:July 2, 3977:May 17, 3949:May 17, 3562:of the 3482:Adamson 3461:Black's 3457:Douglas 3202:FindLaw 2698:Findlaw 2605:May 17, 2518:torture 2345:unusual 2341:unusual 2201:Bucklew 1855:Bucklew 1820:Roberts 1592:torture 1359:Bucklew 1272:torture 1160:, supra 1152:, supra 1119:gibbets 669:as the 648:pillory 644:perjury 343:Signing 321:History 7624:(film) 7008:Treaty 6911:Postal 6906:Pardon 6075:(2023) 6067:(2019) 6059:(1998) 6051:(1993) 6043:(1989) 6022:(1987) 6014:(1951) 5970:(2024) 5962:(2020) 5954:(2011) 5946:(1994) 5938:(1993) 5930:(1991) 5922:(1989) 5914:(1976) 5906:(1968) 5898:(1962) 5890:(1958) 5871:(2002) 5863:(1992) 5855:(1977) 5818:(2019) 5810:(2019) 5802:(2017) 5794:(2016) 5786:(2016) 5778:(2015) 5770:(2014) 5762:(2008) 5754:(2008) 5746:(2007) 5738:(2006) 5730:(2006) 5722:(2006) 5706:(2005) 5698:(2004) 5690:(2002) 5682:(2002) 5674:(1993) 5666:(1990) 5658:(1990) 5650:(1989) 5642:(1989) 5634:(1988) 5626:(1988) 5618:(1988) 5610:(1987) 5602:(1986) 5594:(1986) 5586:(1985) 5578:(1985) 5570:(1984) 5562:(1982) 5546:(1980) 5538:(1978) 5530:(1977) 5522:(1976) 5506:(1972) 5498:(1971) 5490:(1947) 5482:(1879) 5463:(2021) 5455:(2017) 5447:(2016) 5439:(2012) 5431:(2010) 5423:(2003) 5415:(2003) 5407:(1991) 5399:(1983) 5391:(1980) 5383:(1962) 5375:(1910) 5161:. The 5037: 5029: 4331: 4195:Walton 3882: 3236: 2932:(1769) 2540:, and 2526:terror 2443:(1994) 2435:(1993) 2427:(1976) 2302: 2298: 2017: 1893:per se 1791:myopic 1719:Scalia 1658:Powell 1156:e.g., 1148:e.g., 1136:e.g., 1037: 1029: 703: 675: 629: 551:murder 294:Corwin 39:on the 5879:Other 5244: 5093:' 5027:S2CID 4888:(PDF) 4340:(PDF) 4329:S2CID 4317:(PDF) 4254:(PDF) 4247:(PDF) 4207: 4087:(PDF) 4080:(PDF) 3845: 3473: 3448: 3070:(PDF) 3063:(PDF) 2825: 2779: 2762: 2745: 2728: 2679:(PDF) 2487: 2465:Notes 2316: 2308:' 2230: 2194: 2149: 2130: 2106: 2086: 2061: 2037: 2019:..." 2008: 1988: 1971: 1954: 1937: 1922:Gregg 1918:Gregg 1909: 1879: 1815:Coker 1806: 1786:Coker 1777: 1752: 1740:minor 1710:Solem 1701: 1677: 1641: 1627:cold. 1607: 1583: 1568:Weems 1551: 1522: 1505: 1488: 1468:(see 1433: 1415:, or 1396: 1309: 1255: 1206: 1196:. In 1175: 1115:racks 1011: 979: 953: 936: 884: 850:dicta 833: 816: 266:XXVII 246:XXIII 219:XVIII 5246:U.S. 5182:and 5170:2023 5144:2020 5051:2020 5035:SSRN 4952:2020 4918:2020 4864:2020 4838:2020 4807:2020 4762:2020 4731:2020 4683:2020 4641:2020 4598:2020 4567:2020 4533:2020 4491:2020 4453:2020 4410:2020 4348:2020 4296:2020 4209:U.S. 4152:2017 4121:2020 4095:2009 4062:2008 4031:2023 4005:2020 3979:2010 3951:2010 3880:ISBN 3847:U.S. 3793:2020 3767:2020 3733:2020 3707:2020 3652:2024 3609:2020 3580:2020 3534:2020 3508:2012 3475:U.S. 3450:U.S. 3406:2020 3380:2020 3354:2020 3318:2019 3292:2020 3266:2009 3209:2014 3184:2013 3146:2020 3120:2013 3078:2020 3030:2020 2992:2023 2898:both 2827:U.S. 2781:U.S. 2764:U.S. 2747:U.S. 2730:U.S. 2718:See 2706:2020 2658:link 2644:2020 2607:2013 2575:Ibid 2530:pain 2489:U.S. 2367:and 2318:U.S. 2232:U.S. 2196:U.S. 2151:U.S. 2132:U.S. 2108:U.S. 2088:U.S. 2063:U.S. 2039:U.S. 2010:U.S. 1990:U.S. 1973:U.S. 1956:U.S. 1939:U.S. 1911:U.S. 1881:U.S. 1808:U.S. 1779:U.S. 1754:U.S. 1703:U.S. 1679:U.S. 1643:U.S. 1609:U.S. 1585:U.S. 1553:U.S. 1524:U.S. 1507:U.S. 1490:U.S. 1464:and 1435:U.S. 1398:U.S. 1311:U.S. 1257:U.S. 1208:U.S. 1177:U.S. 1117:and 1013:U.S. 981:U.S. 955:U.S. 938:U.S. 886:U.S. 835:U.S. 818:U.S. 721:and 571:Text 506:The 261:XXVI 251:XXIV 239:XXII 212:XVII 192:XIII 165:VIII 6173:VII 6153:III 5249:957 5242:501 5019:doi 4669:at 4212:584 4205:536 3924:", 3850:957 3843:501 3638:of 3566:at 3471:332 3453:238 3446:408 2830:957 2823:501 2784:349 2777:217 2767:238 2760:408 2750:651 2743:430 2733:957 2726:501 2571:Id. 2558:Id. 2554:Id. 2552:.” 2522:Id. 2510:Id. 2506:Id. 2485:553 2321:323 2314:144 2292:an 2228:356 2220:In 2192:587 2175:in 2154:863 2147:576 2140:In 2128:553 2120:In 2104:538 2096:In 2091:957 2084:501 2076:In 2066:263 2059:445 2051:In 2042:130 2027:In 2013:390 2006:506 1993:639 1986:497 1976:356 1969:486 1959:420 1952:446 1942:280 1935:428 1914:153 1907:428 1884:238 1877:408 1838:in 1811:407 1804:554 1796:In 1782:584 1775:433 1767:In 1757:460 1750:567 1728:In 1706:957 1699:501 1682:277 1675:463 1646:514 1639:392 1612:660 1605:370 1597:In 1581:356 1573:In 1556:349 1549:217 1527:304 1520:536 1510:551 1503:543 1493:815 1486:487 1452:" ( 1438:660 1431:370 1401:130 1386:In 1333:in 1307:356 1260:238 1253:408 1245:In 1211:660 1204:370 1180:459 1173:329 1165:In 1162:." 1062:In 1016:321 1009:524 1001:In 984:602 977:509 970:In 958:408 951:538 941:257 934:492 926:In 882:212 874:In 831:342 821:739 814:481 763:or 747:In 705:... 256:XXV 234:XXI 224:XIX 207:XVI 197:XIV 187:XII 160:VII 140:III 110:VII 90:III 7651:: 7028:/ 7024:/ 6369:27 6364:26 6359:25 6354:24 6349:23 6344:22 6339:21 6334:20 6329:19 6324:18 6319:17 6314:16 6298:15 6293:14 6288:13 6270:12 6265:11 6249:10 6168:VI 6158:IV 6148:II 5264:, 5240:, 5209:, 5033:. 5025:. 5015:27 5013:. 5009:. 4991:, 4969:. 4942:. 4938:. 4926:^ 4872:^ 4828:. 4824:. 4791:. 4752:. 4748:. 4717:. 4661:. 4627:. 4477:. 4473:. 4398:38 4396:. 4392:. 4369:. 4325:15 4323:. 4319:. 4203:, 4138:. 4051:. 4022:. 3968:. 3942:. 3878:. 3876:98 3866:. 3841:, 3660:^ 3634:. 3617:^ 3588:^ 3558:. 3542:^ 3478:46 3469:, 3444:, 3326:^ 3257:. 3200:. 3098:^ 2978:. 2937:^ 2888:If 2877:97 2875:. 2871:. 2859:^ 2850:, 2837:^ 2775:, 2758:, 2741:, 2724:, 2695:. 2674:. 2654:}} 2650:{{ 2630:. 2615:^ 2577:." 2536:, 2528:, 2492:35 2483:, 2312:, 2235:86 2226:, 2190:, 2164:. 2135:35 2126:, 2111:63 2102:, 2082:, 2057:, 2035:99 2033:, 2004:, 1984:, 1967:, 1950:, 1933:, 1905:, 1875:, 1802:, 1773:, 1748:, 1736:48 1697:, 1673:, 1637:, 1603:, 1588:86 1579:, 1547:, 1518:, 1501:, 1484:, 1460:, 1448:, 1444:, 1429:, 1411:, 1394:99 1392:, 1314:86 1305:, 1251:, 1202:, 1171:, 1007:, 949:, 932:, 889:86 880:, 829:, 812:, 767:. 696:: 553:. 534:. 229:XX 202:XV 182:XI 170:IX 155:VI 145:IV 135:II 105:VI 95:IV 85:II 7032:) 7020:( 7004:) 6244:9 6239:8 6234:7 6229:6 6224:5 6219:4 6214:3 6209:2 6204:1 6163:V 6143:I 6116:e 6109:t 6102:v 5333:e 5326:t 5319:v 5172:. 5146:. 5132:" 5091:O 5081:. 5053:. 5021:: 4954:. 4920:. 4906:" 4881:" 4866:. 4852:" 4840:. 4809:. 4764:. 4733:. 4685:. 4659:" 4655:" 4643:. 4600:. 4582:" 4569:. 4547:" 4535:. 4521:" 4517:" 4493:. 4471:" 4467:" 4455:. 4441:" 4437:" 4412:. 4386:" 4373:. 4367:" 4363:" 4350:. 4310:" 4298:. 4284:" 4280:" 4154:. 4123:. 4109:" 4097:. 4064:. 4033:. 4007:. 3993:" 3981:. 3953:. 3888:. 3795:. 3781:" 3769:. 3735:. 3721:" 3709:. 3695:" 3654:. 3611:. 3597:" 3582:. 3556:" 3536:. 3522:" 3510:. 3408:. 3394:" 3382:. 3368:" 3356:. 3320:. 3294:. 3280:" 3268:. 3211:. 3186:. 3148:. 3134:" 3122:. 3080:. 3056:" 3032:. 3018:" 2994:. 2708:. 2660:) 2646:. 2609:. 2306:O 1789:" 1274:. 838:1 510:( 476:e 469:t 462:v 277:: 175:X 150:V 130:I 100:V 80:I 20:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Index