Eighth Amendment
The Eighth Amendment of the United States Constitution, adopted in 1791, serves primarily to protect individuals from abuses of governmental power in the context of criminal justice. Rooted in the English Bill of Rights, the amendment prohibits excessive bail and fines, as well as cruel and unusual punishments, although the application of its provisions has evolved through judicial interpretation. The U.S. Supreme Court has emphasized the need to assess punishment in light of "evolving standards of decency," which influences decisions regarding the constitutionality of various forms of punishment.
Key rulings have established that executing individuals with mental disabilities and minors is considered cruel and unusual punishment, thereby unconstitutional. While the amendment forbids inhumane treatment and disproportionate sentencing, the Supreme Court has not classified the death penalty itself as inherently cruel. Recent cases continue to explore the nuances of punishment, including the conditions of confinement and the methods used in executions. The amendment remains a vital aspect of ongoing discussions about justice, human rights, and the ethical treatment of individuals within the legal system.
On this Page
Eighth Amendment
Description: Amendment that forbids requiring excessive bail, imposing excessive fines, and inflicting cruel and unusual punishments.
Significance: The three clauses of the Eighth Amendment are the only provisions in the Constitution that place substantive limits on the severity of punishments in criminal cases. The Supreme Court’s role has been to interpret these clauses.
The Eighth Amendment is derived almost verbatim from the English Bill of Rights (1689). Adopted in 1791 as part of the US Bill of Rights, the amendment was intended to prohibit the abuse of federal government power, but the precise meaning of the amendment is unclear and has required interpretation by the Supreme Court. The first two clauses of the Eighth Amendment (prohibiting excessive bail and fines) have not been applied to the states. Although the Court has never established an absolute right to bail, it has reviewed whether bail has been set higher than necessary to ensure that a defendant appears for trial.
The Supreme Court has taken a flexible interpretation of the cruel and unusual punishment clause, stating in Trop v. Dulles (1958) that punishments should be evaluated in light of the “evolving standards of decency” of a maturing society. The clause was formally applied to the states in Robinson v. California (1962). In Atkins v. Virginia (2002), the US Supreme Court ruled 6–3 that executing individuals with mental disabilities constituted cruel and unusual punishment and was therefore unconstitutional. In a majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote, "Construing and applying the Eighth Amendment in the light of our 'evolving standard of decency,' we therefore conclude that such punishment is excessive and that the Constitution 'places a substantive restriction on the State's power to take the life' of a mentally retarded offender." A similar Supreme Court ruling, in Roper v. Simmons (2005), found that the execution of minors was also a violation of the Eighth Amendment. Barbaric punishments are prohibited under the Eighth Amendment, but the Court has refused to hold that the death penalty itself is cruel and unusual punishment. In Glossip v. Gross (2015), the Court ruled 5–4 that there was insufficient evidence to support the claim that the use of the drug midazolam for executions by lethal injection was cruel or unusual; however, in a dissenting opinion Justice Stephen Breyer, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, argued that it was "highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment." Punishments disproportionate to the crime, the inhumane treatment of prisoners, and adequate conditions of confinement, may also violate the Eighth Amendment.
Bibliography
Bessler, John D. Cruel and Unusual: The American Death Penalty and the Founders' Eighth Amendment. Boston: Northeastern UP, 2012. Print.
Eighth Amendment: Further Guarantees in Criminal Cases. Washington, DC: GPO, 2002. PDF file.
Hurley, Lawrence. "Divided U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Lethal Injection Process." Reuters. Thomson Reuters, 29 June 2015. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
Lane, Charles. "5–4 Supreme Court Abolishes Juvenile Executions." Washington Post. Washington Post, 2 Mar. 2005. Web. 2 Dec. 2015.
Scott, Charles L, and Joan B. Gerbasi. "Atkins v. Virginia: Execution of Mentally Retarded Defendants Revisited." Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 31.1 (2003): 101–5. Print.