Claims by the condemned that extraordinary delay in carrying out the execution constitutes cruel and unusual punishment are cognizable under U.S. law. The court reasoned that the delay in carrying out the defendant's punishment was not due to any scheme to prolong his period of incarceration or an effort to torture the defendant. Instead, the delay was due to the defendant's availment of procedures designed to ensure that capital punishment is carried out in appropriate circumstances, i.e., procedures required by the U.S. Supreme Court to avoid the danger of arbitrariness and error which can accompany unduly swift executions. Capital punishment is supported by a majority of the citizens in a majority of the states. Many citizens do not support it, preferring instead life imprisonment without possibility of parole.
Some opponents believe capital punishment is ineffective as a deterrent to criminal activity.
The vast majority insist on procedural fairness. This debate has been reflected, in part, in continuing litigation. In 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded that the death penalty constituted cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment because its application failed to pass constitutional muster. And within Pennsylvania, over half of the death row population comes from Philadelphia, where only fourteen percent of the State's population resides. Other stated causes for concern include inadequate representation of counsel, lack of a fair hearing at which exculpatory evidence can be submitted, and the unavailability of exonerating evidence until long after the trial.