Continued Violations of International Law by the United States in Applying the Death Penalty to MInors and Possible Repercussions to the American Criminal Justice System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
when it addressed the similar question of whether or not the execution of children younger than sixteen years of age was constitutional in Thompson v. Oklahoma. 20 There, the Court concluded in a plurality opinion that imposing the death penalty on a fifteen year old offender would "offend civilized standards of decency" in violation of the cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment. 21 The plurality decision relied upon the views of the international community regarding the juvenile death penalty. 22 The Court looked to several nations' attitudes against the juvenile death penalty in reaching its conclusion that a consensus existed among the international community opposing the execution of children. 23 In addition, Justice Stevens noted three current international treaties which prohibit the use of the death penalty on juvenile offenders. 24 These treaties included: Article 6 Paragraph 5 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) -a global civil rights treaty prohibiting the execution of minors 20.Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988) (Stevens, J., plurality opinion).Thompson stands for the proposition that the imposition of the death penalty on juveniles is too extreme a punishment due to the fact that fifteen year olds do not possess the requisite culpability to be death penalty eligible because "during the formative years of childhood and adolescence, minors often lack the experience, perspective, and judgment expected of adults."Id. at 834 (quoting Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 86, 104, 115-16, n.11 (1958)).21. Id. at 821.See also Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 101 (1958) (Warren, C.J. plurality opinion) (holding that "[t]he basic concept underlying the Eighth Amendment is nothing less than the dignity of man .The amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.")Id. at 100-01.22. Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815, 830 (1988) (Stevens, J., plurality opinion).23.The Court stated that "[t]he conclusion that it would offend civilized standards of decency to execute a person who was less than 16 years old at the time of his or her offense is consistent with the views that have been expressed by other nations that share our Anglo-American heritage, and by the leading members of the Western European community."Id. at 830.Subsequently the Court mentioned the fact that several nations had either abolished the death penalty or restricted its use by excluding juveniles, id. at 830-31, specifically noting that the United Kingdom, New Zealand, and the Soviet Union prohibit the execution of juveniles; that Canada, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland allow capital punishment only for "exceptional crimes such as treason[;]" and that West Germany, France, Portugal, The Netherlands, and all of the Scandinavian countries forbid capital punishment.Id.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".