Kennedy v Louisiana
Critical Facts
The state of Louisiana charged Patrick Kennedy, herein referred to as the accused, with aggravated rape of his eight years old stepdaughter. The jury in the trial court found the accused guilty of aggravated rape and afterwards passed a death penalty following the then statute which allowed for a death sentence if the rape victim was under the age of twelve years.
The accused appealed his conviction to the Supreme Court of Louisiana challenging the constitutionality of the statute under which he was convicted. The Supreme Court of Louisiana affirmed the holding of the lower court by stating that a death sentence for a crime of raping a child is not disproportionate. Determined to have his death penalty quashed, the accused filed for an appeal in the United States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of the United States on a vote of five to four held that the imposition of a death sentence for child rape not amounting to death violates the Eighth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment.
Issues
Key issues before the United States Supreme Court were as follows:
- Whether the death sentence violates an accused person’s constitutional rights secured under the Eighth Amendment?
- Was Louisiana statute allowing death sentence for non-homicide crime such as rape unconstitutional?
Majority Opinion
In a five to four decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Louisiana statute legalizing death sentence for the rape of a child was unconstitutional. Ground for unconstitutionality is premised on the notion that the rape of the child did not result in death. The Supreme Court of the United States followed the set tests for Eighth Amendment cases. The Supreme Court’s framework on Eighth Amendment cases follows the precedent established in the cases of Atkins v Virginia and the case of Roper v Simmons.
The first step of the abovementioned test requires the Supreme Court to review legislative provisions by looking for evidence of national consensus on the issue. The second limb of the test requires the Supreme Court to exercise independent judgment by determining the proportionality of a death sentence to the crime committed.
On consensus, the assenting judges weighed forty-four states without the death penalty against six states which made child rape a capital crime. Moreover, assenting judges analyzed state practice by looking at actual executions for any form of rape. The court found that there have been only two incidents of execution for the crime of rape since 1964. Therefore, the United States Supreme Court finally concluded that there was a national consensus against the death penalty for child rape.
Disagreeing with Louisiana argument on the shifting trends in different jurisdictions to allow the death penalty for child rape, the United States Supreme Court held in its assertion that societal norms should not be based on pending legislation.
In addition to the above arguments, the majority noted with clarity that cases involving non-homicide crimes resulting in injury to a person or the public could not be compared with murder. The comparison is incompatible when you take into account the severity and irrevocability of homicidal cases.
Dissenting Opinion
Dissenting in Kennedy v Louisiana first analyzed the effect of the United States Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Coker v Georgia. In the Coker case, the court mentioned above held that the death penalty was disproportionate to the crime of rape adult women and violated the Eighth Amendment because it’s cruel and unusual nature. The dissenting honourable Justice Powell in the Kennedy case relied in the case of Coker on the distinction between murder and rape, thereby prompting criticism from the dissent who faulted the dicta of Coker for discouraging states from supporting the enactment of the legislature on death penalty for child rape.
Further, the dissenting argued that it was a bad precedent to use the Coker dicta in Kennedy’s case since state legislation was affected by the former and hence incorrect to compare Kennedy to Atkins case.
Dissenting judges further maintained the stand that the court had failed to support its main justification. The judges were holding that murder in its nature unique, severe and permanent in terms of injury caused to the victim and the public, therefore, cannot be compared with non-homicidal cases.
My take on court’s opinion
I’m afraid I have to disagree with the United States Supreme Court’s decision. Children are considered as the most vulnerable in society and deserve the most protection. The act of raping a minor of eight years threatens the life of the victim. Therefore, any person who violates a child’s fundamental rights by endangering a child’s life ought to be punished on equal measure. That is by imposing capital sentencing when an adult of sound mind defiles a child of tender age. Further, capital sentencing would act as a deterrent to any person likely to commit any crime against a child.
I can’t entirely agree with the United States Supreme Court that the death penalty is disproportionate to the crime of rape. The court fails to indicate the parameters it used to determine that homicidal cases attracting capital punishment cannot be compared to non-homicidal cases. A child’s rape by a person in authority is an irrevocable act due to the harm occasioned to the victim.