Cite as: 536 U. S. 304 (2002)
Scalia, J., dissenting
337
| STATE | POLL | DATE | RESPONSE | QUESTION | ||
| 25% somewhat less likely | defendant was mentally retarded or otherwise mentally impaired in a serious way, would you be much less likely to support the use of the death penalty in this specific case, somewhat less likely, or would it make no difference to you?" | |||||
| US | Houston Chronicle (Feb. 2001) Stephen Brewer & Mike Tolson, A Deadly Distinction: Part III, Debate Fervent in Mental Cases, Johnny Paul Penry Illustrates a Lingering Capital Conundrum, The Houston Chronicle, Feb. 6, 2001, at A6 | 2001 | 63.8% no support 16.4% support 19.8% not sure/ no answer | "Would you support the death penalty if you were convinced the defendant were guilty, but the defendant is mentally impaired?" |
Justice Scalia, with whom The Chief Justice and Justice Thomas join, dissenting.
Today's decision is the pinnacle of our Eighth Amendment death-is-different jurisprudence. Not only does it, like all of that jurisprudence, find no support in the text or history of the Eighth Amendment; it does not even have support in current social attitudes regarding the conditions that render
Page: Index Previous 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 NextLast modified: October 4, 2007