Furman V. Georgia
Case name: William Henry Furman v. State of Georgia
Year decided: 1972
Result: 5-4, in favor of Furman
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Eighth Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court ruled that the enforcement of the death penalty in cases of rape and murder convictions qualified as cruel and unusual punishment. The justices had various opinions on the matter and published over two hundred pages of concurrence and dissent. Some held that the death penalty itself constituted as cruel and unusual punishment while others noted that the death penalty has been imposed arbitrarily, often displaying a racial bias toward African American inmates. The Court's ruling prompted states and the national legislatures to refine their laws regarding capital offenses to affirm that the death penalty will not be imposed unfairly or inconsistently.
Quote from majority opinion: "Thus, these discretionary statutes are unconstitutional in their operation. They are pregnant with discrimination, and discrimination is an ingredient not compatible with the idea of equal protection of the laws that is implicit in the ban on "cruel and unusual" punishments. Any law which is nondiscriminatory on its face may be applied in such a way as to violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Summary of the dissent: Because the use of capital punishment has decreased over the years, it is now considered "cruel and unusual." However, cruel and unusual punishment is defined by barbaric and inhumane penalties that often include "lingering death." Death penalty is neither cruel or unusual and is therefore constitutional.
Six-word summary: Execution in name of justice questioned.
Year decided: 1972
Result: 5-4, in favor of Furman
Related constitutional issue/amendment: Eighth Amendment (cruel and unusual punishment)
Civil rights or civil liberties: civil liberties
Significance/precedent: The Court ruled that the enforcement of the death penalty in cases of rape and murder convictions qualified as cruel and unusual punishment. The justices had various opinions on the matter and published over two hundred pages of concurrence and dissent. Some held that the death penalty itself constituted as cruel and unusual punishment while others noted that the death penalty has been imposed arbitrarily, often displaying a racial bias toward African American inmates. The Court's ruling prompted states and the national legislatures to refine their laws regarding capital offenses to affirm that the death penalty will not be imposed unfairly or inconsistently.
Quote from majority opinion: "Thus, these discretionary statutes are unconstitutional in their operation. They are pregnant with discrimination, and discrimination is an ingredient not compatible with the idea of equal protection of the laws that is implicit in the ban on "cruel and unusual" punishments. Any law which is nondiscriminatory on its face may be applied in such a way as to violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Summary of the dissent: Because the use of capital punishment has decreased over the years, it is now considered "cruel and unusual." However, cruel and unusual punishment is defined by barbaric and inhumane penalties that often include "lingering death." Death penalty is neither cruel or unusual and is therefore constitutional.
Six-word summary: Execution in name of justice questioned.