Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
I submit to you that the death penalty is racially discriminatory in the way that it's applied, and it's also a cruel and unusual punishment. We are always advancing the science of forensics and we often find that someone we thought was guilty turns out to be innocent, or vice versa. The justice system is inherently imperfect because it relies on people and imperfect laws, but the death penalty specifically is applied in a very discriminatory manner and that violates the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment of the Constitution.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection
https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitu...ghth_amendment
I actually don't disagree that the death penalty is currently applied in a (racially) discriminatory fashion. So I would uphold your argument on 14th Amendment grounds.
I do however disagree with your argument on 8th Amendment grounds. The death penalty has been around since the dawn of this country. People were executed in the 1700s. If the intent of the 8th Amendment was to disallow capital punishment it would say so. It doesn't.
Could the death penalty be "fixed" to be racially blind? Probably not in the immediate future while our country still battles racism.
People (voters), in general, like the death penalty, when they are asked. It has won twice this decade in the People's Republic of California, in 2012, and 2016. So it's just not a "conservative" or "red state" thing.
I think people like the idea of the death penalty for "the worst of the worst". Terrorists, serial killers, child killers etc. But when you peel away the layers and rind of how it's currently implemented, well it, fails.
Anyway, those are my thoughts and musings. If I was called to be a juror, during voir dire I would answer in the affirmative that I would be able to apply the death sentence if necessary.