Question: Rogers v. Okin and Kennedy v. Louisiana, are both concerning an Amendment?

Context articles: Coker v. Georgia
The Constitution is not a suicide pact
Kennedy v. Louisiana
Sean Dewart
Boston State Hospital
Rogers v. Okin
Frank Rogers (record producer)
Rogers v. Grimaldi
Rogers v. Tennessee
Stephen Halbrook

Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) , held that the death penalty for rape of an adult woman was grossly disproportionate and excessive punishment, and therefore unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
 A few states continued to have child rape statutes that authorized the death penalty.
 In "Kennedy v. Louisiana" (2008), the court expanded "Coker", ruling that the death penalty is unconstitutional in all cases that do not involve murder or crimes against the State.
"The Constitution is not a suicide pact" is a phrase in American political and legal discourse.
 The phrase expresses the belief that constitutional restrictions on governmental power must be balanced against the need for survival of the state and its people.
 It is most often attributed to Abraham Lincoln, as a response to charges that he was violating the United States Constitution by suspending "habeas corpus" during the American Civil War.
 Although the phrase echoes statements made by Lincoln, and although versions of the sentiment have been advanced at various times in American history, the precise phrase "suicide pact" was first used in this context by Justice Robert H. Jackson in his dissenting opinion in "Terminiello v. Chicago", a 1949 free speech case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court.
 The phrase also appears in the same context in "Kennedy v. Mendoza-Martinez", a 1963 U.S. Supreme Court decision written by Justice Arthur Goldberg.
Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008) , is a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that the Eighth Amendment's Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause prohibits imposing the death penalty for the rape of a child in cases where the victim did not die and death was not intended.
Cecil Sean McWilliam Dewart is a lawyer in Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
 He is a partner in the Toronto law firm, Dewart Gleason LLP.
 He was counsel on a number of high-profile cases, including Jane Doe v. Metropolitan Toronto Commissioners of Police, Rogers v. Sudbury (Administrators of Ontario Works), and Payne v. Ontario (Ministry of Energy, Science and Technology), which stopped the Ontario government from privatizing Ontario Hydro.
 Later, he juniored for partner Tim Gleason in a number of cases, including "General Motors of Canada v CAW et al." and Evans v. Toronto, in which the City was found partially liable for injuries to a cyclist resulting from poor urban planning.
Boston State Hospital is a historic mental hospital located in Mattapan and Dorchester, Massachusetts.
 The court case "Rogers v. Okin", which increases patient consent rights, was filed by a class action lawsuit against the hospital.
 The hospital was closed in 1979, and has been completely demolished and the site is in the process of being redeveloped.
Rogers v. Okin was a landmark case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit considered whether a mental patient, committed to a state psychiatric facility and assumed to be competent, has the right to make treatment decisions in non-emergency conditions.
Frank Mandeville Rogers V (born in Florence, South Carolina) is an American record producer, songwriter and session musician.
 In 1990, Rogers made the trek to Nashville, attending Belmont University and graduating with a Music Business degree.
 While at Belmont, he met friend and future collaborator Brad Paisley.
 After graduation, Rogers went to work for EMI Nashville Productions and opened up Sea Gayle Music Publishing with Paisley and Chris DuBois.
 The successful publishing company, where all three writers write, has had over 300 cuts and 28 number one songs.
 The three business partners, in late 2009, also teamed up with Sony Nashville to form Sea Gayle Records, with a roster that includes Jerrod Niemann.
Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994 (2d Cir.
 1989) is a trademark and intellectual freedom case, known for establishing the ""Rogers" test" for protecting uses of trademarks that implicate intellectual freedom issues.
Rogers v. Tennessee, 532 U.S. 451 (2001) , was a U.S. Supreme Court case holding that there is no Due Process violation for lack of fair warning when pre-existing common law limitations on what acts constitute a crime, under a more broadly worded statutory criminal law, are broadened to include additional acts, even when there is no notice to the defendant that the court might undo the common law limitations, so long as the statutory criminal law was made prior to the acts, and so long as the expansion to the newly included acts is expected or defensible in reference to the statutory law.
 The court wrote,
Stephen P. Halbrook is a Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute and an author and lawyer known for his litigation on behalf of the National Rifle Association.
 He has written extensively about the original meanings of the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment (the latter as applied to Second Amendment rights).
 He has argued and won three cases before the US Supreme Court: "Printz v. United States", "United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company", and "Castillo v. United States".
 He has also written briefs in many other cases, including the Supreme Court cases "Small v. United States" (pertaining to the Gun Control Act of 1968) and "McDonald v. Chicago".
 In "District of Columbia v. Heller", he wrote a brief on behalf of the majority of both houses of Congress.
 More broadly, his decades of research on the Second Amendment contributed to the intellectual foundation of the "Heller" decision.
 He has written many books and articles on the topic of gun control, some of which have been cited in Supreme Court opinions ("Heller", "McDonald", "Printz v. United States").
 He has testified before congress on multiple occasions.
 Halbrook’s most important scholarly contribution, however, was the book "That Every Man Be Armed", originally published in 1986.
 The book was the most thorough analysis of the legal history and original intent of the Second Amendment.