The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

The Public Policy

(Page 2 of 2)

With the section of the Eighth Amendment prohibiting "cruel and unusual punishments," William James Rummel might well say that we've lost our way.

Rummel was sentenced to life imprisonment in Texas (with eligibility for parole in 12 years, but with no guarantee of parole) for three nonviolent and minor offenses -- the fraudulent use of a credit card to obtain $80 worth of goods and services in 1964, passing a forged check in the amount of $28.36 in 1969, and obtaining $120.75 by false pretenses in 1973.

Citing precedent, i.e., itself, the Supreme Court rejected Rummel's argument that his life sentence was a violation of the constitutional ban on "cruel and unusual punishments" by pointing to a 1912 case, Graham v. West Virginia, in which the Supreme Court rejected an Eighth Amendment claim from a horse thief who had been sentenced to life imprisonment after stealing three horses --- one horse at a time, in 1898, 1901 and 1907.

In 1958, Chief Justice Earl Warren stated that the Eighth Amendment "must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

The evolution is slow. It wasn't until 2002 that the Supreme Court ruled, 6-3, that executions of mentally retarded criminals are "cruel and unusual punishments," a violation of the Eighth Amendment.

Ralph R. Reiland is an associate professor of economics at Robert Morris University in Pittsburgh.

topics:
Taxes, Transportation, Economics, Business, Constitution, Law, Supreme Court