Recently, the Supreme Court
decided not to hear a case about whether children who kill should be
executed. Their refusal makes it all but
certain that some states will continue this practice until the people on the
Court change.
Five justices, Chief William
Rehnquist and Associates Sandra O’Connor, Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas, voted against
hearing the case. Their votes should
surprise no one, as most of them also dissented in a similar case last year, Atkins
vs. Virginia.
In that case, the Court forbid the execution of mentally retarded individuals. In his dissent, Rehnquist, joined by Scalia and Thomas, said that the majority relied too much
on “opinion polls.” Scalia
added, “…society’s moral outrage sometimes calls for the execution of retarded
offenders.”
What about the outrage in
killing the mentally retarded? Or in putting children to death?
Society writes laws to
protect its citizens and to deter them from harming others. The average adult understands laws well
enough to know that using a gun, for example, will bring serious legal
consequences.
But children, like those
with mental impairments, may not understand.
They sometimes lack the ability to comprehend and to learn. Justice Stevens took note of this fact in his
dissent when he wrote, “Neurocientific evidence of the
last few years has revealed that adolescent brains are not fully developed,
which often leads to erratic behaviors and thought
processes in that age group.”
Look around just about any
neighborhood in the
Maybe these child criminals
enjoy destroying property. Maybe they
want attention. Whatever the reason,
they have not yet understood they are not the only ones who disobey the
law. In other words, they don’t see that
they could be the next victims of crime.
When some of these kids grow
older and still don’t get it, they may move on to heinous crimes like rape and
murder. Executing them will not deter
the new children of crime. If they could
understand the consequences of killing, they would have understood the
consequences of graffiti and stopped their involvement with crime.
The United States Supreme
Court should be composed of members willing to listen to logic. By turning down the opportunity to ban the
death penalty for children, they leave unfinished business for those who will
replace them.