Emma Dean

Ms. Oberg
English 11
5 November 2015
Is the Death Penalty Unconstitutional?
The death penalty is a highly controversial topic in the United States, and almost
everybody has a different opinion on it. While it was once a commonly accepted form of
punishment, today the death penalty is abolished by most of the developed world, and the
Supreme Court is now reconsidering the legitimacy of this system. I, for one, believe that the
death penalty should be eliminated throughout the nation for violating the Constitution,
specifically Amendment VIII, and Amendment XIV.
Some people might argue that the death penalty would have been long eradicated if it
violated the Constitution. Some might even point to the U.S. Constitution to claim that the
Founding Fathers actually supported the death penalty. However, this really isnt as rational of an
argument as it may sound. Are we really going to continue this method of killing as punishment
simply because thats how it was always done? The Constitution was written to ensure that the
government would never abuse or overextend their powers, yet here we are, giving our leaders
the power to actually take away someones life. A poll conducted in 2010 asked what the
punishment for murder should be, and 61% of participants advocated for options other than the
death penalty, such as life without parole (deathpenaltyinfo.org). If more than half of American
people surveyed do not support capital punishment, then we need to start taking action toward
abolishing this failed system.

One of the most successful arguments against the death penalty is that it is cruel and
unusual, and as a result, is a violation of Amendment VIII, which states that "Excessive bail shall
not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
Punishments that are degrading to human dignity, arbitrary, or unnecessary fall into the realm of
cruel and unusual. I personally believe that to deliberately and calculatedly take someones
life is cruel, no matter the circumstances, and furthermore, it is unusual in its hypocritical use as
a method of punishment. But in terms of a legal standpoint, capital punishment is just as wrong.
In 1972, the Supreme Court temporarily banned the death penalty because they thought it
satisfied the definition of cruel and unusual. Four years later, the Supreme Court ruled that the
death penalty was no longer cruel and unusual, and thus was reinstated. However, there have
been numerous instances since that suggest that this is not the case. In 1990, for example, Jesse
Tafero was sent to the electrical chair, but instead of a quick death as promised, due to a mistake
in a component of the electrical chair, his head caught on fire (Von Drehle). Mistakes like these
are not uncommon in executions, and they always pose many risks. Lethal injection, the
predominant execution method, was concocted seemingly at random, without much research
gone into it at all. Furthermore, these injections are not administered by professionals, but by
people who know next to nothing about drugs. One little slip-up could cause extreme pain to the
subject - practically torture.
No matter what great lengths are put into examinations, pretrials, and trials, there is
always a risk of convicting the innocent, and with the death penalty, we risk the chance of
executing the innocent. Recent research has estimated that at least 4% of all people who receive
the death penalty are innocent (Forbes.com). When talking about something as valuable as a
persons life, even just 1% is far too much. Furthermore, capital punishment is a system that

condemns certain people and not others based on factors like income level and race. Most
defendants on trial for the death penalty simply do not have the money to afford their own
attorney, so the state assigns them with lawyers that often lack the skills and incentive needed to
do their job properly - thus increasing the chances of a death sentence. Studies have also found
that the race of both the defendant and the victim plays a large role in capital punishment. Since
the reinstatement of the death penalty in 1976, 254 black defendants have been executed for the
murder of white victims, while only 18 white defendants have been executed for the murder of
black victims. Numbers like these discount for any probability of mere coincidence. Amendment
XIV in the Constitution states that [No] state [shall] deprive any person of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws". Due process means that the government cannot arbitrarily or unjustly
take away an individuals rights and deprive them of appropriate legal procedures and
safeguards. However, all the above statistics and facts point to definite misconduct on the
governments part, and as a result, makes the death penalty a clear violation of the fourteenth
Amendment.
In conclusion, after extensive research on both sides of the argument, I am still firmly
against the death penalty. Not only do I find the death penalty wrong on a moral level, but the
constitution also deems it wrong on a legal level. When a system is based off of killing as
punishment, especially the amateurish killing of racial minorities and low-income citizens, it
should be a clear indicator that there is something terribly flawed with it. Death in itself is too
final and enormous a judgement, and it is unwise to give that power solely to the hands of the
government. As a country founded on the principles of life, liberty, and property, it is time to put
to death the defective system that is the death penalty.

Works Cited:
Public Opinion About the Death Penalty DPIC
16 November 2015. Web.
Lopatto, Elizabeth. How Many Innocent People Are Sentenced to Death?
Forbes.com. 29 April 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.
ProCon.org. "Is the death penalty unconstitutional?"
ProCon.org. 6 June 2013. Web. 12 Nov. 2015.
Rafferty, Shannon. Death Penalty Persuasive Essay
Psu.edu. November 15, 2014. Web.
Von Drehle, David. Death Penalty Walking
TIME. Jan 2008. Web.