Amendment Eight: Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?
Bail, the fee accused persons pay to be set free from jail until a trial is held, cannot be unfairly high in relation to the crime committed; nor can fines be too high in relation to the crime. People cannot be punished in what are determined to be cruel and unusual ways.
Probably the most controversial and important part of the Eighth Amendment is the clause that prohibits "cruel or unusual punishment." How does a court determine if a punishment is cruel or unusual? This clause comes from a Bill of Rights added to the English Constitution in 1689 and then used for a Declaration of Rights drafted by George Mason for Virginia.
When the Constitution was being ratified by the states and the Bill of Rights was added, one of the most significant and feared powers added to the federal government was the power to punish criminals. Abraham Holmes argued that Congress might repeat the abuses of “that diabolical institution, the Inquisition,” and start imposing torture on those convicted of federal crimes: “They are nowhere restrained from inventing the most cruel and unheard-of punishments, and annexing them to crimes; and there is no constitutional check on them, but that racks and gibbets may be amongst the most mild instruments of their discipline.” Patrick Henry asserted, “Congress . . . . may introduce the practice of France, Spain, and Germany of torturing, to extort a confession of the crime. They . . . will tell you that there is such a necessity of strengthening the arm of government, that they must . . . extort confession by torture, in order to punish with still more relentless severity. We are then lost and undone.”
This amendment has been contended and debated over the ages. What counts as cruel and unusual? Is the death penalty cruel and unusual. There are many arguments for and against this in what is probably the most debated amendment to the Bill of Rights.
When the Constitution was being ratified by the states and the Bill of Rights was added, one of the most significant and feared powers added to the federal government was the power to punish criminals. Abraham Holmes argued that Congress might repeat the abuses of “that diabolical institution, the Inquisition,” and start imposing torture on those convicted of federal crimes: “They are nowhere restrained from inventing the most cruel and unheard-of punishments, and annexing them to crimes; and there is no constitutional check on them, but that racks and gibbets may be amongst the most mild instruments of their discipline.” Patrick Henry asserted, “Congress . . . . may introduce the practice of France, Spain, and Germany of torturing, to extort a confession of the crime. They . . . will tell you that there is such a necessity of strengthening the arm of government, that they must . . . extort confession by torture, in order to punish with still more relentless severity. We are then lost and undone.”
This amendment has been contended and debated over the ages. What counts as cruel and unusual? Is the death penalty cruel and unusual. There are many arguments for and against this in what is probably the most debated amendment to the Bill of Rights.
