< PREVIOUS ] [ 2005 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that it is unconstitutional for states to execute death sentences upon convicts who were less than 18 years old at the time of the crime.
It was a 5-4 decision, and Justice Anthony Kennedy, a 1988 appointee of President Ronald Reagan, wrote the majority opinion. He has been roundly criticized by right-thinkers, and much of that criticism is justified.
The case before the court, Roper v. Simmons, came out of
Missouri. Christopher Simmons, who was 17 at the time,
persuaded two friends to assist him in the murder of
Shirley Crook on Sept. 9, 1993. She was tied up and beaten,
then tossed in the Meramec River to drown. Simmons told his
abettors that they could get away with it
because
they were juveniles.
Obiously, this is not a case of some misled youth getting carried away after running with a bad crowd. It was a premeditated cold-blooded murder, organized by someone who was trying to game the system. And if the people of Missouri decide that a 17-year-old with the ability to plan, conspire and commit a murder is also competent to suffer the death penalty for his actions, who are we to argue?
But the U.S. Constitution does not make it that easy.
The Eighth Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights, is short
but not exactly simple: Excessive bail shall not be
required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and
unusual punishments inflicted.
It doesn't define excessive,
yet the previous
amendment is quite specific when it comes to money. There's
a constitutional right to a jury trial in all suits at
common law where the value in controversy shall exceed
twenty dollars.
Elsewhere, a levy on slave imports is
allowed, not exceeding ten dollars for each
Person.
So the Founding Fathers certainly could have defined
excessive
in dollars, but they didn't. As for
cruel and unusual,
I suspect that most of us today
would have trouble with amputation as a punishment -- for
instance, chopping off a thief's right hand. Yet the Fifth
Amendment clearly contemplates such punishment: nor
shall any person be subject for the same offence to be
twice put in jeopardy of life or limb.
Amputation would be an unusual
penalty in this
country now; I don't know of any state which offers it. The
prohibition against unusual punishment
implies that
there's such a thing as usual punishment.
And that
would not be a fixed standard, since both the states and
the Congress often change criminal laws and their
penalties. George Washington would now face major prison
time for a hemp crop that was perfectly legal in his
day.
So Justice Kennedy did have a constitutional basis for
noting that 30 states prohibit excecutions of juvenile
offenders, and that most nations of the world likewise
prohibit such executions. How else could you define
usual
and unusual
?
He also took one step toward simplifying the legal definition of adulthood. The decision put the age at 18, at least for capital cases.
It's a murky area. For instance, in Colorado, a 12-year-old can be tried as an adult for certain crimes, if the juvenile court so rules. The DA's office can file directly for 14-year-olds.
You might think that anyone who's old enough to be held
responsible for a murder might be old enough to be
responsible in other matters, but that's not the case. The
age of consent
for sex in our state is generally 17,
but it can be as low as 15 if the older party is near the
same age. Otherwise, sex with an underage person is rape
because the law deems the minor incapable of granting
consent.
If you're 18, you can vote and sign contracts, but you can't drink even 3.2 beer until you're 21, although in my jejune days you could drink 3.2 beer at 18 but not vote until 21. And we could operate small motorcycles on the public roads when we were only 14.
The definitions of adulthood seem to be stretching both ways -- younger for criminal prosecutions, older for driving and alcohol. In ways, that reflects reality, since our faculties don't mature at the same time. But it's also unrealistic, since different people mature at different rates, and there's no magic fairy who bestows adult wisdom on your 18th or 21st birthday -- no matter what the law says.
Justice Kennedy's opinion was somewhat muddled and
confusing -- but when it comes to determining when someone
comes of age,
so is our entire legal and judicial
system.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 2005 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >