This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Alexander, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Cruel And Unusual Punishment: A Slowly Metamorphosing Concept

Ohio State University

Newly appointed U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas criticized his colleagues for turning the Constitution into a national code of prison regulation and for misapplying the Eighth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment of the Bill of Rights forbids the imposition of cruel and unusual punishment, a concept vaguely defined by the Constitution's authors. Court interpretations of the concept reveal that it draws its meaning from an evolving standard of decency that represents the progress of a maturing society. The idea of "cruel and unusual punishment" was first applied by the U.S. Supreme Court to state statutes in 1961 and to the prison system in 1976. Currently, there is no consensus on the application of the concept to state statutes in determining constitutional punishments. In prisons, however, the application of it has stalled and narrowed considerably, making prisoners less likely to prevail successfully in the courtroom. This paper concludes that Justice Thomas's characterization of the Court's interpretation of the Cruel and Unusual Punishment Clause is unfounded hyperbole.

Criminal Justice Policy Review, Vol. 6, No. 2, 123-135 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/088740349200600203


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?