During the last decade, the Supreme Court has applied the 8th Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments against some of the harsher sentencing policies implemented by various states. Three cases dealing with juvenile offenders – Roper v. Simmons (2005), Graham v. Florida (2010), and Miller v. Alabama (2012) – illustrate this moderating trend. An underlying rationale of these decisions – “disproportionality” – contrasts with rationales guiding the Court’s earlier (pre-2002) interpretations of the 8th Amendment (see Davis, 2008).
Respond to this 3-part question in your initial post:
Explain the rationale which seems to guide the current Supreme Court majority’s approach to defining “cruel and unusual punishment.”
Contrast this approach with an important rationale that seems to guide the pre-2002 Court.
Evaluate both of these approaches. Explain and justify your evaluation by drawing on persuasive evidence apart from your own personal opinion (e.g., research findings from sociology or criminal justice).
Your initial post should be at least 250 words in length. Support your claims with examples from the required material(s) and/or other scholarly resources, and properly cite any references. Respond to at least two of your classmates’ posts by Day 7 in at least 100 words. Respond to someone whose perspective on “cruel and unusual punishment” differs from yours.

+1 862 207 3288 