Prejean v. Blackburn
Headline: Court refused review of many death-penalty cases, leaving numerous state death sentences in place while two Justices urged ruling that the death penalty is always unconstitutional.
Holding: The Court declined to review a group of state and federal death-penalty cases, leaving the lower-court death sentences intact while two Justices dissented and urged overturning those sentences.
- Leaves existing state death sentences in place for now.
- Prevents Supreme Court review of these specific capital cases.
- Highlights ongoing disagreement about death-penalty constitutionality.
Summary
Background
The opinion lists dozens of cases from federal appeals courts, state supreme courts, and state criminal courts and notes that review by the nation’s highest court was denied. The short text identifies these matters as involving death sentences, and the Court’s formal action was to decline further review of those lower-court decisions.
Reasoning
The Court’s main action in the published text is procedural: it denied review of the listed cases and therefore did not decide the underlying constitutional question about the death penalty in these matters. Two Justices filed a dissenting statement, saying they adhere to their long-held view that the death penalty is always cruel and unusual punishment under the Constitution and that they would have taken the cases and vacated the death sentences.
Real world impact
Because the Court refused to take these cases, the existing death sentences and the rulings of the lower courts remain in effect for now. The denial means the Supreme Court did not settle the broader constitutional dispute about whether the death penalty is categorically unconstitutional. The dissent highlights continuing disagreement among Justices over the death penalty’s constitutionality, signaling that the issue remains unsettled at the highest level.
Dissents or concurrances
Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall jointly dissented. They stated they would have granted review and vacated the death sentences, reiterating their view—citing earlier opinion—that the death penalty is always prohibited as cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments.
Opinions in this case:
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?