I’m dubious about how many child abductors really do that kind of calculus – it seems to me that most of them already kill their victims anyway – but even so, the vast majority of sexual assaults on children are not committed by strangers but by people close to them (family members ranking at the top of the list), who would not be likely to kill the victims, so I have doubts about how much deterrent value would really have on child murder.
While I’m not a fan of capital punishment I think SCOTUS erred. Executing a child rapist is unusual, but it’s not cruel. There are alot of reasons why executing child molestors is a bad idea, but cruelty isn’t on of them. So now the only crimes against individuals than can be punished with death are those result in the victim’s death, but crimes against the state (treason, espionage, etc) can still carry the death penalty without need of a dead victim? This doesn’t apply to the military, does it? There’s alot of crimes punishable by dead in the UCMJ. Aren’t a couple soldiers facing a death sentence for raping an Iraqi girl?
Speaking as someone who was raped as a child, I say yeah, SCOTUS.
I think anyone who is opining about the result without having read both the opinion of the Court and the dissent is simply passing gas through the upper opening. 
Read the opinions, then offer commentary.
What’s McCain have to do with it. Obama’s out against the ruling..
There’s an interesting analysis of the decision here in which Dahlia Lithwick argues that although she agrees with the result, she doesn’t like the process he used to get there:
What I wonder about is the deterrent value that the death penalty would have on the victims (and the adults responsible for them) to report the crime in cases of incest. The stakes get a lot higher when you know Uncle Bob’s going to fry for what he did instead of just go to prison.
From Alito’s dissent:
Who can argue with that? How is he wrong?
Would not adding a new capital crime “extend” or “expand” the death penalty?
I’m against the death penalty without any exceptions. Citing trends is a bizarre line of reasoning, and I’m not sure about pointing to the strain of making a child testify makes sense either. I’m not sure this court was going to do any better, and I agree that the punishment is just not proportional to the crime here. But I understand the reservations people have here.
That aside - the court ruled decades ago that death was not a Constitutional punishment for rape. By what logical standard are are people asserting that raping a child is worse than raping an adult? That just doesn’t make any sense to me.
The court ruled in Coker that raping an ADULT woman was not sufficient grounds for the DP. The thinking is that an adult, while feeling horrific pain at being raped, would have the mental capacity to understand the wrong being perpetrated on her, while a child would grow up with conflicted and irrational beliefs regarding sexuality.
And to Frank, I think Alito is saying that this is not expanding the DP as historically rapists have been subject to capital punishment. It is only overreaching decisions by the Court that try to limit it…
I figured that was the reasoning, more or less. I’m not sure I find it compelling here, but it’s an academic question for me anyway.
That’s a very good argument for the legislature to repeal a law, but not for a court to strike it down. It’s not a judge’s place to stike a law down just because it’s bad policy.
According to the TV show Rome, the Romans used to train baboons to rape Roman women as form of punishment. That seems that a good punishment for a child rapist.
Is it cruel and unusual?
…well, it’s I’m sure as shit it’s unusual…
I’m against the death penalty for any crime, so I’m pleased with the ruling. I’m also generally in favor of the idea that “cruel and unusual” is a phrase whose meaning inherently depends on societal standards of “cruelty”, and so should be treated as evolving over time.
I’m curious: Does the fact that many child rapists were molested/raped as children themselves(*) factor into people’s feelings on this issue? I’m not saying that in any way excuses their actions, but if their behavior ultimately stems from severe untreated abuse when they were in their formative years, it might justify treating them more compassionately, no?
(*) Someone’s going to ask for a cite on that, and I don’t have one, it’s just my impression from conversations with my wife, who studied Social Work under a leading authority on child molestation. But I suppose it’s possible I’m misinterpreting things she’s said.
Having the death penalty might also result in more killings in the (fortunately pretty rare) case of a stranger abducting and raping a child.
I haven’t read the opinion or dissents. I’ve always been against the DP for any crime, but think it’s debatable on constitutional grounds.
I think Alito misinterprets the Eighth. I think it was intended from its inception to be an evolving, fluid concept. Now, I think Kennedy is probably wrong in his application of that view to this case, but I think it could easily be argued that the original meaning of the Eighth was to include decisions such as this.
Why not take it further and declare a death penalty on the victims, too, since they will inevitably turn into rapists themselves?
Because that just dosn’t make since.
Why don’t we just kill ourselvs now because we will die someday.
Your argument is very flawed.