High Court Weighs Juvenile Executions

Greensboro (NC) News and Record

January 30, 2004

Editorial

Five pris­on­ers on North Carolina’s death row are among the 73 inmates in America who will anx­ious­ly await a U.S. Supreme Court deci­sion. The pris­on­ers were under 18 years old when they committed murder.

This week the nation’s high­est court agreed to review whether the U.S. Constitution per­mits juve­niles to be exe­cut­ed. The court will decide if those who were 16 or 17 years old when they com­mit­ted mur­der can be giv­en the death penal­ty. Of the 38 death-penal­ty states, 17 for­bid exe­cut­ing those who killed when they were under 18. North Carolina per­mits exe­cu­tions if the crime occurred when the killer was 17 but not 16.

America is the only Western democ­ra­cy that still legal­izes exe­cu­tions. This page is an oppo­nent of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment because we believe it is arbi­trar­i­ly and capri­cious­ly applied. We believe that life impris­on­ment with­out parole is the proper punishment.

The advent of DNA test­ing in the late 1980s has revealed the inno­cence of more than 100 peo­ple on death rows. In some cas­es pris­on­ers have been with­in hours of exe­cu­tion. The uncer­tain­ty about the guilt of death-row inmates recon­firms our oppo­si­tion to cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. So do dis­clo­sures about inad­e­quate legal coun­sel for those fac­ing capital crimes.

The U.S. Supreme Court has delib­er­at­ed in the past about juve­nile exe­cu­tions. In 1989, the court said it was uncon­sti­tu­tion­al to exe­cute peo­ple when they were younger than 16 at the time of the crime because it vio­lat­ed the Eighth Amendment’s ban on ​“cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment.” The court’s deci­sion, it said, was influ­enced by the grow­ing dis­use of juve­nile exe­cu­tions and by state laws and pub­lic atti­tudes (it weighed sim­i­lar fac­tors when it banned the exe­cu­tion of the mentally retarded).

Yet in 2002, the court refused to recon­sid­er juve­nile exe­cu­tions despite urg­ing from four jus­tices — David Souter, John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer. The jus­tices said exe­cut­ing 16- and 17-year-olds was ​“incon­sis­tent with evolv­ing stan­dards of decen­cy in civ­i­lized soci­ety.” But they need­ed a fifth jus­tice to cre­ate a majority.

The court will not hear argu­ments in the cur­rent case until next October, and the out­come is uncer­tain. The spe­cif­ic case involves a Missouri man who mur­dered a woman when he was 17. The killing was gris­ly. He robbed her, wrapped her head in duct tape and tossed her off a rail­road bridge. He is now 27 (four of the North Carolina inmates are now in their 20s, anoth­er in his 30s).

In recent years the Supreme Court has chipped at the mar­gins of the death penal­ty. It banned exe­cu­tion of the retard­ed and raised stan­dards for legal coun­sels. It is time for the court to end juve­nile exe­cu­tions, too.