Warning

Info

Warning

Info

Warning

Info

LSDefine

Simple English definitions for legal terms

Furman v. Georgia (1972)

Read a random definition: American Law Institute test

A quick definition of Furman v. Georgia (1972):

Furman v. Georgia (1972) was a case in the United States Supreme Court that dealt with the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment in death penalty cases. The court found that the death penalty was unconstitutional when applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner, as it disproportionately harmed minorities and the poor. This decision put a hold on the use of the death penalty while states revised their criminal statutes to ensure that it was not applied unfairly. The death penalty was later reinstated in 1976 after the case of Gregg v. Georgia.

A more thorough explanation:

Furman v. Georgia (1972) was a case heard by the U.S. Supreme Court that dealt with the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment in death penalty cases. The case involved three petitioners who were sentenced to death for their crimes.

The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether the death penalty violated the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment when applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner. The Court found that it did, as the death penalty was disproportionately applied to minorities and the poor.

As a result of this decision, the use of the death penalty was put on hold while states revised their criminal statutes to ensure that the death penalty was not applied arbitrarily or discriminatorily. The death penalty was later reinstated in 1976 in the case of Gregg v. Georgia.

Example: William Henry Furman, Lucious Jackson, and Hamilton Branch were all sentenced to death for their crimes. The Supreme Court found that the death penalty was unconstitutional when applied in an arbitrary or discriminatory manner, as it disproportionately harmed minorities and the poor.

fungible things | further affiant sayeth naught

Warning

Info

General

General chat about the legal profession.
main_chatroom
👍 Chat vibe: 0 👎
Help us make LSD better!
Tell us what's important to you
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:06
it means you will not be rejected today and may be accepted or WL in the future
Just got my Michigan rejection
BookwormBroker
16:10
same
RoaldDahl
16:10
@HopefullyInLawSchool: what if i already got rejected. does it mean anything
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:12
@RoaldDahl: Likely not however it could mean nothing
RoaldDahl
16:15
So if it means nothing does that mean something?
HopefullyInLawSchool
16:17
Possibly
RoaldDahl
16:26
Cool
RoaldDahl
16:26
thank you!!!! i hope it means something
pinkandblue
16:31
fart
IrishDinosaur
16:36
Mich R gang lesgooo
Did anyone else get that random get to know nova email?
HopefullyInLawSchool
17:21
Ya it was sent to all YM applicants
starfishies
17:37
Anyone get the NDLS email inviting you to apply for something even though they haven’t made a decision on your app yet
17:38
Better yet I got the email and I was rejected last month
starfishies
17:38
Wtf
starfishies
17:39
and the deadline is in like a week what is this
any cardozo movement?
BatmanBeyond
18:01
Sent a LOCI via portal, but I'm wondering if email would have gotten me a swifter response
BatmanBeyond
18:02
This whole hold/wait-list/reserve system is a headache
loci already?
BatmanBeyond
18:09
If the odds are like 1-2% I don't think it matters much by the numbers
12:11
I got the same NDLS email
OrangeThing
12:18
I think the user profiles are broken
19:29
Any word out of Notre Dame?
19:29
Only the invitation to apply for LSE
19:29
Anyone received a decision from NDLS?
19:50
when did u guys apply that just heard from umich? they havent even glanced at my app yet
0:30
how am i supposed to spy on people when profile links are broken?
Right. Broken links smh
LSD+ is ad-free, with DMs, discounts, case briefs & more.