This paper explains that the U.S. Supreme Court decision "Roper v. Simmons" (2005) holds that the death
penalty for juveniles is "cruel and unusual" and as such, the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution forbid the execution of
offenders who were under the age of 18 when their crimes were committed. The author points out that the advocates for
juvenile death penalty argue that a
murder committed by a 16 or 17
year old is as gruesome as that committed by an adult and that individuals exhibit different ranges of
maturity thus some 17 year olds may be more "mature" than other 20 year olds. The paper states that, in opposition to the juvenile death penalty, psychologists and behavioral scientists have long known that adolescents do not yet have a brain ability to reason as
adults do, are 'wired' to behave more irrationally than adults and are subjected to hormonal instability. Table of Contents Arguments for Juvenile Death Penalty A Murder is a Murder Case-to-Case Basis Deterrence No Consensus Arguments against Juvenile Death Penalty Brain Development Raging Hormones Adolescents are Similar to Mentally-Retarded People Death Penalty is no Deterrent for Juvenile Offenders No Death Penalty does not mean Complete Clemency for Offenders Public Opinion International Stance Conclusion
More summaries about the Death Penalty for Juvenile Offenders