Thursday, February 12, 2026

THIEL COLLEGE Comment No. 2

Did the U.S. Supreme Court get it right when they decided Furman v. Georgia in 1972? The decision found that the death penalty was not cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment, but was unconstitutional arbitrary in its application. 

Posted by at
Labels:

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

Thiel Student #7:

The Supreme Court was correct in its judgment regarding Furman v. Georgia. While I am not a legal scholar and cannot speak to the Constitutionality of the Death Penalty in general, it is abundantly clear that the Death Penalty needed to be removed because of its arbitrary nature.

I do find error in the Court's refusal to outright declare the Death Penalty unconstitutional. I think the Death Penalty has reverted to its arbitrary status: whether you can be sentenced to death seems to have more to do with what state you live in than the severity of your crime. I think that, under the current system, the fair enforcement of the law as it relates to capital punishment is impossible. It is for this reason that I believe the Supreme Court should have declared the death penalty to be fully unconstitutional in Furman v. Georgia. The Court's holding has solved nothing.

February 12, 2026 at 10:32 AM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student No. 2:
I think that the Supreme Court did get it right when they made their decision about Furman v. Georgia in 1972. The death penalty itself is not cruel nor unusual punishment, if it is utilized in a correct and consistent way. People who commit like mannered crimes should receive like mannered consequences, and this is why the death penalty needs to be consistent. If the death penalty is going to be considered to be non cruel, then it needs to be applied in the same way to all people who commit the same type of crime. When a court becomes inconsistent with its application, this is when it leans towards being cruel and unusual. There are some mitigating and aggravating circumstances that change a judge's choice of punishment, but this should not be applicable to death penalty cases if it is to remain Constitutionally sound and fair.

February 12, 2026 at 10:36 AM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student No. 6: When it came down to the decision with Furman V. Georgia, I believe that the supreme court made the right decision. Especially whenever he committed an act such as murder. His trial also lasted for one day. And Furman only had an education in 6th grade. His case also ended the whole era of the death penalty which helped reform the death penalty to the new era.

February 14, 2026 at 8:48 AM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student 4:
In my opinion the Supreme Court decision in this case was justified. The court ruled that in this case based on the defendants lack of education and the way he committed the murder the death penalty was unconstiutional. The court outlined the death penalty which lasted until 1976. Overall, the court made the right decision however they failed to ban the death penalty entirely. I understand the of states right but it seems unfair for someone to commit a heinous crime in one state and not be sentenced to death, but another state someone can commit the exact same crime and be sentenced to death. At one point we have to look at death penalty and realize it is wasting money and it is an out dated form of punishment.

February 16, 2026 at 11:23 AM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student #5:
The Supreme Court ruling of Furman v. Georgia (1972) was ruled correctly as the death penalty is not automatically unconstitutionally. Arbitrariness is often influenced by race, geography, and jury discretion which is displayed in the case. Since 1972, the decision of capital punishment has been restructured and more consistent standards rather than riding it entirely. Overall, Furman v. Georgia strengthened the legal system regarding applying a punishment just as severe as the crime in a non-discriminatory way.

February 18, 2026 at 3:49 PM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student #1:
The Supreme Court was correct in their ruling in Furman v. Georgia (1972). This ruling in many ways exposed a profound injustice at the heart of the American death penalty system. While the Court did not hold that capital punishment was inherently unconstitutional, it recognized that the way it was being applied was lawless. The ruling went on to find that the chance of being executed consistently fell hardest on Black defendants, particularly in cases involving white victims. A punishment that is administered without standards, consistency, or racial neutrality cannot possibly align with the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment

February 18, 2026 at 6:04 PM
Anonymous said...

Thiel student #9
In Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Supreme Court said the death penalty itself was not automatically cruel and unusual, but the way it was being used was unfair. Judges and juries had too much freedom, so similar crimes sometimes got very different punishments. Race and location often affected who received the death penalty. Because it was being applied randomly and unfairly, the Court ruled it unconstitutional at that time. Later, in Gregg v. Georgia (1976), the Court allowed the death penalty again after states created clearer rules. Overall, the decision helped make the justice system fairer and more consistent.

February 19, 2026 at 10:02 AM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student #3
I believe the US Supreme Court did get it right when they said that while not cruel and unusual under the eighth amendment, that it was arbitrary. Different courts deciding when someone was sentenced to death was inconsistent, and depending on what court your trial was held in could have changed your sentence. For example, if a court in a southern state had a black defendant on trial, the chances of them being sentenced to death was higher. Concurrences within the decision allude to this, making it one of their focuses while deciding. The death penalty at the time was arbitrary, so I agree with their ruling.

March 2, 2026 at 11:14 AM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student 8:

The Supreme Court was arguably correct when it decided that the implementation of the death penalty was cruel and unusual seeing as minority groups were more likely to face execution. The fact that certain categories of the population were more likely to face the death penalty was cruel because execution was disproportionately affecting marginalized groups instead of being equally utilized for certain offenses. Whether or not the death penalty has been sufficiently reformed to be equally utilized contemporarily is up for debate, but the death penalty itself should not be considered cruel and unusual because it reflects the severity of violent offenses that would qualify for consideration of the death penalty being utilized.

March 23, 2026 at 1:17 PM
Anonymous said...

Thiel Student 10-
I think that the Supreme Court was right when they ruled it was not cruel and unusual. I feel as though it can serve a valuable purpose if we use it fairly. People shouldn't get to skew the court based on where they are and everyone should be treated equally.

April 1, 2026 at 6:18 PM

Post a Comment