This week, the Supreme Court once again revisited
the question of the death penalty, this time to determine if the method
used by most states, lethal
injection, is cruel
and unusual.
Dead Certainty by Jennifer Culbert, recently released by Stanford University Press, examines the history of Supreme Court death penalty cases, providing a solid background for understanding the debate currently taking place in the Court. Culbert focuses not on the ethical and moral issues surrounding the death penalty, but rather looks at the Supreme Court’s decisions in these cases to understand how the Justices understand judgment. She finds that the death penalty began to be questioned when the Supreme Court started looking for an external, objective truth to justify each death sentence, as opposed to trusting a jury to weigh the idiosyncrasies of each individual case.
The case currently before the Supreme Court also rests on the search for certainty when we cannot access infallible, external truth: the Court is considering whether the third and final shot in a lethal injection is sometimes unnecessarily and cruelly painful when the second renders inmates unable to signal that they are in pain.
Comments