Supreme Court Rejects Death Penalty for Child Rapists

July 2, 2008, JEFFERSON CITY, MO –  On Wednesday, June 25, 2008, the U.S. Supreme ruled in Kennedy vs. Louisiana that the Eighth Amendment bars imposing the death penalty on a child rapist where the crime did not result in the death of the child.

In the 5-4 decision, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote that the use of capital punishment must be limited to those offenders who commit the most serious crimes and whose extreme culpability makes them the most deserving of execution. Justice Kennedy also pointed out that a review of the death penalty, current state statutes and new enactments shows a national consensus against the use of capital punishment for the crime of child rape. While thirty-six states impose the death penalty, only six states authorize it for child rape.

During his 2008 State of the State address, Governor Matt Blunt asked lawmakers to make the rape of a child punishable by death. Two bills were filed during the 2008 legislative session which sought the death penalty for anyone convicted of child rape. Neither bill passed.

Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, dissented from the majority opinion. All four of the dissenting justices are Catholic. Justice Alito stated in his dissent that there was no clear national consensus that the death penalty should not be imposed on a child rapist and that previous Supreme Court decisions that rejected the imposition of the death penalty in rape cases should not govern the result in Kennedy vs. Louisiana. Justice Alito also stated in his opinion that child rapists should be considered extremely culpable for their actions and the seriousness of the crime should allow the use of capital punishment.

“While raping a child is a particularly heinous crime,” said Rita Linhardt of the Missouri Catholic Conference, “imposing the death penalty for child rape could have the opposite effect the law intended by increasing the trauma these children suffer, and placing child victims at greater risk of death.”

Ms. Linhardt pointed out that enacting the death penalty for child rape could reduce the chance of the rape being reported. Many child rapists know or are close to the victim’s family. If the death penalty is a possibility these relationships could lead victims, and family members who suspect the abuse, to remain silent rather than report the crime. Also, the possibility of the death penalty could create more of an incentive for the perpetrator to kill the victim and eliminate the witness.

Opponents also argued that imposing the death penalty for child rape would also lead to an increased number of hearings and appeals, forcing victims called to testify to relive painful events and seriously disrupting their healing process. Studies have shown that child victims find testifying in criminal court to be traumatic, not cathartic. The extended appeals process that follows a death sentence could draw out the trauma experienced by the child victim and his or her family and delay the healing process.