Against the death penalty / Justice Stephen Breyer ; edited by John Bessler.

Enhanced descriptions from Syndetics:

" A landmark dissenting opinion arguing against the death penalty.



Does the death penalty violate the Constitution? In Against the Death Penalty , Justice Stephen Breyer argues that it does; that it is carried out unfairly and inconsistently and, thus, violates the ban on ""cruel and unusual punishments"" specified by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.



"Today's administration of the death penalty," Breyer writes, "involves three fundamental constitutional defects: (1) serious unreliability, (2) arbitrariness in application, and (3) unconscionably long delays that undermine the death penalty's penological purpose. Perhaps as a result, (4) most places within the United States have abandoned its use."



This volume contains Breyer's dissent in the case of Glossip v. Gross , which involved an unsuccessful challenge to Oklahoma's use of a lethal-injection drug because it might cause severe pain. Justice Breyer's legal citations have been edited to make them understandable to a general audience, but the text retains the full force of his powerful argument that the time has come for the Supreme Court to revisit the constitutionality of the death penalty.



Breyer was joined in his dissent from the bench by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Their passionate argument has been cited by many legal experts including fellow Justice Antonin Scalia--as signaling an eventual Court ruling striking down the death penalty. A similar dissent in 1963 by Breyer's mentor, Justice Arthur J. Goldberg, helped set the stage for a later ruling, imposing what turned out to be a four-year moratorium on executions. "

Reviews provided by Syndetics

CHOICE Review

Justice Stephen Breyer aims to outline why capital punishment is unfair, inconsistent, and ultimately unconstitutional. Breyer leaves the reader with no doubt that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution. The book provides a history of capital punishment and outlines the legal challenges to the imposition of death as the ultimate punishment. Breyer's book consists of an introduction that provides context for the case of Glossip v. Gross. This 2014 United States Supreme Court case involved the issue of whether the three-drug protocol used in lethal injection contributed to increased pain for the defendant, and thus violated the "cruel and unusual" clause of the Eighth Amendment. The Court, in a 5-4 decision, found in favor of the State of Oklahoma and allowed the practice to continue. The introduction is written by John Bessler (Univ. of Baltimore). Bessler contextualizes and annotates Breyer's dissent in Glossip. The remainder of the book is the full text of Justice Breyer's dissent, which was joined by Justice Ginsburg. Legal scholars consider Breyer's dissent in Glossip as a signature event in the possible end of capital punishment. Arguing against the Death Penalty is an important book in the field, best suited for anyone generally interested in issues related to capital punishment in the US. Summing Up: Highly recommended. Upper-division undergraduates through faculty. --Aaron RS Lorenz, Ramapo College