[Alberta's Child]

If you want to argue against the death penalty on any of the grounds that you've described, then fine. But ruling the death penalty unconstitutional on any of those grounds is intellectually dishonest. And deciding that the death penalty is unconstitutional only when it is applied to "retarded" people is such an idiotic application of the law that the U.S. Supreme Court has less moral authority than a cockroach.

[eagleye]

Alberta's Child,

Thanks for your response. I am much more interested in the question of whether the death penalty is intelligent and moral social policy than whether or not it is strictly constitutional. I lack the legal expertise to address that question with much authority.

Regarding strict constitutional interpretation, it is interesting to note that most constitutional amendments in recent years have been offered by "conservatives."