# data[].attributes.body
Chief Justice:
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices:

Antonin Scalia

Sandra Day O'Connor

Clarence Thomas

Anthony Kennedy

John Paul Stevens

David Souter

Ruth Bader Ginsburg

Stephen Breyer

# data[].attributes.body
Christopher Simmons, age 17,  was sentenced to death in 1993.

A series of rejected appeals to state and federal courts, lasting until 2002

In 2002 the U.S Supreme Court ruled that the executing of the mentally disabled violated the 14th Amendment (Atkins v. Virginia)

Because of this ruling the Missouri Supreme Court decided to reconsider Simmons' case.

# data[].attributes.body
The Lower Court in this case was the Supreme Court of Missouri

Ultimately, the Missouri Court decided, 6 - 3, that the U.S. Supreme Court's 1989 decision in Stanford v. Kentucky (which validated the execution of minors) was no longer valid. The court held that national opinion regarding the death penalty had changed. The final decision was that the execution of minors was now unconstitutional.

# data[].attributes.body
Petitioner:

Missouri Supreme Court rejected the holding and rationale of Supreme Court Case Stanford v. Kentucky, a case by which they were bound.

The Supreme Court should stand by their decision in Stanford

It should be in the hands of legislators to determine the precise minimum age for capital punishment

It should also be in the hands of jurors to determine the culpability of individual defendants above that minimum age

The Missouri Court went beyond its powers to question the distinction of age, which was an element of culpability analysis.

Respondent:

Where does the contemporaneous society draw the line of evolving standards of decency?

Since the case of Stanford, new scientific evidence has emerged which changes the way the constitution is interpreted.

The Society has concluded that 18 is the bright line between childhood and adulthood. But with respect to executions, that line is very robust and very deep

The United States is alone in the world in its justification of executions for 17-year-olds

# data[].attributes.headline
Question of the Supreme Court and the Answer

# data[].attributes.subject
Question of the Supreme Court and the Answer

# data[].attributes.body
Question:
Does the execution of minors violate the prohibition of "cruel and unusual punishment" found in the Eighth Amendment and applied to the states through the incorporation doctrine of the 14th Amendment?

Answer:
Yes it does and it is applied to the states. The standards of decency have evolved so that executing minors is "cruel and unusual punishment" prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. The court decided against juvenile death penalty among state legislatures.

# data[].attributes.body
Majority of Opinion: By Anthony Kennedy

The standards of decency have evolved so that executing minors is cruel and unusual

The Court pointed to "overwhelming" international opinion against the juvenile death penalty.

# data[].attributes.body
Dissenting:
Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Clarence Thomas

Cited Stanford v. Kentucky to claim that "so little has changed"

Concurring:
Justices John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Anthony Kennedy,  Stephen Breyer and David Souter

Cited Stanford v. Kentucky as well, but to support evolving standards of decency.

# data[].attributes.body
This  Court case established that children under the age of 18 could not suffer the death penalty. It overturned the ruling of Stanford v. Kentucky, which held that the execution of minors was not unconstitutional.

Because it overruled a previous Court ruling, thus setting a new precedent for questions regarding minors and the death penalty, Roper v. Simmons is an example of Judicial Activism.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.c-span.org/video/?183896-2/supreme-court-juvenile-death-penalty