Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-7955_aplc.pdf
Page Number: 51.0

Cite as:  576 U. S. ____ (2015) 

1 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 14–7955 
_________________ 

RICHARD E. GLOSSIP, ET AL., PETITIONERS v.
 
KEVIN J. GROSS, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
 

[June 29, 2015]

 JUSTICE  BREYER,  with  whom  JUSTICE  GINSBURG  joins,

dissenting. 

For the reasons stated in JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR’s opinion,
I dissent from the Court’s holding. But rather than try to
patch up the death penalty’s legal wounds one at a time, I 
would  ask  for  full  briefing  on  a  more  basic  question: 
whether the death penalty violates the Constitution. 

The relevant legal standard is the standard set forth in
the  Eighth  Amendment.    The  Constitution  there  forbids 
the  “inflict[ion]”  of  “cruel  and  unusual  punishments.” 
Amdt.  8.  The  Court  has  recognized  that  a  “claim  that
punishment  is  excessive  is  judged  not  by  the  standards 
that  prevailed  in  1685  when  Lord  Jeffreys  presided  over 
the ‘Bloody Assizes’ or when the Bill of Rights was adopted,
but  rather  by  those  that  currently  prevail.”    Atkins  v. 
Virginia, 536 U. S. 304, 311 (2002).  Indeed, the Constitu­
tion  prohibits  various  gruesome  punishments  that  were
common  in  Blackstone’s  day.    See  4  W.  Blackstone,  Com­
mentaries on the Laws of England 369–370 (1769) (listing
mutilation and dismembering, among other punishments). 
Nearly  40  years  ago,  this  Court  upheld  the  death  pen­
alty  under  statutes  that,  in  the  Court’s  view,  contained
safeguards  sufficient  to  ensure  that  the  penalty  would  be
applied reliably and not arbitrarily.  See Gregg v. Georgia, 
428 U. S. 153, 187 (1976) (joint opinion of Stewart, Powell,