Among academicians, death penalty supporters are referred to as abolitionists . The following discussion examines various points of dispute between the two camps, and argues that the abolitionists have the stronger argument on all points. Retentionists interpret cruel as disproportionate and irrational, and unusual as rare or infrequent. The retentionists' position is that capital punishment is neither disproportionate nor irrational, and that whether such punishment is infrequent is irrevelent. They also remind us that after a moratorium of 10 years, the Supreme Court ruled again in 1976 that capital punishment was not in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Abolitionists disagree, claiming that capital punishment violates the Eight Amendment.
Their argument is twofold. First, they assert that the Supreme Court should and does continually reinterpret the Constitution in light of an ever-changing social climate. This argument is convincing in light of the fact that the court has indeed changed its position. Abolitionists disagree, claiming that capital punishment violates the Eight Amendment. Their argument is twofold.