Court must ban barbaric practice of executing minors

The Supreme Court announced this week that it will soon hear a
new case, Roper v. Simmons, regarding the constitutionality of
executing minors. For years, the high court has tacitly approved of
executing teenagers who were at least 16 years old when they
committed their crime by allowing states to set their own minimum
age limit. This practice is barbaric. It is high time for the
United States to ban the execution of minors.

The Court’s choice to hear this case brings to mind its
2002 ruling that it is unconstitutional to execute mentally
retarded criminals. One of the main issues at hand was whether or
not the criminal can understand his or her situation and
culpability. The Court decided mentally retarded people cannot
fully grasp either concept. Executing them is cruel and unusual
punishment ““ and thus forbidden by the Constitution.

So is it the same for kids? Some people would say that a 16- or
17-year-old is mature enough to know right from wrong, and thus
should face the death penalty as an adult would. Then again, few
would say the same if the defendant were 7 years old. So where do
you draw the line? Is there a magic age when a child becomes an
adult, with the capability of understanding the charges against him
or her?

In order to be considered an adult for the purposes of
participating in the public governance of this nation (e.g.,
voting, joining the armed forces), one must be 18 years old.

The fact that we, as a nation, have decided 17-year-olds are not
mature enough to vote for the president fundamentally assumes that
such people do not fully understand the consequences of their
actions. And exceptions are never made for 17-year-olds who do well
on their SATs or those with high IQ scores.

So while some 17-year-olds might be able to wisely vote for a
president, none are allowed the opportunity. Yet at the same time,
states are allowed to pick and choose which 16- and 17-year-olds
are able to recognize right and wrong ““ and pay with their
lives.

In fact, the unfair execution of minors is just one facet of an
overwhelming set of data pointing out the flaws of capital
punishment. But the extreme example of executing kids places
capital punishment in a light revealing its true nature.

All in all, this is an ugly debate over an ugly question: Should
we have capital punishment at all, either for minors or for
adults?

Proponents of the death penalty usually support it on two
different grounds: that it is morally just and that it serves a
practical purpose. A supporter would argue that people who murder
and/or rape deserve to die and it’s the state’s moral
duty to execute them. On practical grounds, proponents would argue
it’s an effective crime deterrent and an efficient form of
punishment.

The question of morality is beyond the scope of this column. But
the practical implications absolutely must be addressed.

The death penalty is quite expensive; costs vary from state to
state, but it is clear we as a society pay dearly, financially, for
executions. According to The Sacramento Bee, between 1977 and 1993,
California spent approximately $1 billion to process capital
punishment cases, a period in which the state only executed two
people.

In a time when education funding is being drastically reduced,
it seems absurd to waste such money ““ particularly since it
is becoming increasingly apparent that the system itself is
broken.

Too many innocent people are sitting on death row. For example,
as reported in The Nation, our state has a very large death row.
Between 1992 and 2000, it rose from 350 inmates to nearly 550.
During those years, California executed seven people (less than 3
percent of the nation’s total executions) while 23 sentenced
to death had their punishments overturned by state or federal
courts.

These facts notwithstanding, getting rid of the death penalty
entirely is probably a long way off. Banning the execution of
minors, however, is something that can be accomplished very soon.
Aside from all the death penalty’s contradictions and gross
imperfections, with kids, the institution seems even more
abhorrent.

Raimundo is a fifth-year economics and political science
major. E-mail him at araimundo@media.ucla.edu. Send general
comments to viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *