14th Amendment Pros And Cons

608 Words3 Pages
This misunderstanding contributes to a misguided approach to legal interpretation when it comes to Justice Powell’s interpretation of the 8th and 14th Amendments. He said that McCleskey could not rely solely on the Baldus study in order to prove a violation of the 14th Amendment, which is true, as Baldus himself acknowledged. However, simply because there is more needed does not mean that the entire Baldus study should be dismissed. I believe that if Justice Powell would have also had an open-minded viewpoint at the unfair, unequal treatment of blacks, he would have the discretion to better understood the violation of the equal protection of the 14th Amendment, leading him to hopefully make a better decision. Furthermore, Justice Powell was misguided when he placed the burden of proof of “the existence of purposeful discrimination” on McCleskey. He argued that discretion…show more content…
However, he used faulty logic when implying that discretion is always a good thing because it “offers substantial benefits to the criminal defendant.” Clearly in this case, there is an overreaching amount of negative discretion that results in an affirmation of the defendant’s death sentence. Using that discretion in order to be lenient may be good to some defendants, but being lenient to some and not to all is still discriminatory. It would not be “alien to us” to have a capital punishment system that did not allow for leniency, because then blacks and whites might receive more equal treatment. Justice Powell also used faulty logic when implying that taking McCleskey’s position leads to a negative conclusion. Our criminal justice system should be questioned to ensure equality and fairness for all races, penalties, genders and other minority groups. The Constitution provides for equal treatment of all under the law, not leniency for whites and a greater enforcement and punishment for

More about 14th Amendment Pros And Cons

Open Document