Philosophy of Law (Essay Sample)

Student’s Name Instructor’s Name Course Date
Introduction
During the time of his sentence, Christopher Simons was aged 17, and he was still pursuing his high school education. He was found guilty of a brutal murder the court gave him a death sentence. However, the court of appeal reviewed the case on the basis of him being a juvenile at the time he committed the crime. Reviews on the United States constitution gave a different consideration of offenders who faced death penalty but they are mentally unstable, or they are below the age of 18 that qualifies one to be an adult (Roper V. Simmons p.1). In the Supreme Court determination of Simmons case, the majority decision upheld the notion that it was not right to sentence a juvenile such as Simmons as if he was an adult. However, three judges during the supreme ruling held a different view and they were against the majority decision in the ruling.
Reasons for the majority opinion against the juvenile death penalty
The underlying reason for this decision was the fact that the death sentence was meant for serious crimes and whose extreme culpability warranted execution (Roper V. Simmons p.1). According to the historical perspectives, on previous rulings the level of liability of a juvenile was less compared to that of an adult in severe cases such as a brutal murder (Roper V. Simmons p.1). Firstly, the court noticed that approximately all the states did not allow juvenile to participate in activities such as voting, sitting in juries and entering into a nuptial union. On the marriage part, the involvement of a parent will allow a juvenile to engage in such an act. The main reason behind this is that such a juvenile has not reached that age of making sound and valid decisions. Developmental psychology suggests that most individuals attain maturity at the age of 18 ( Elrod & Scott p 25). Therefore, individuals below this age are vulnerable to be involved in acts that are devoid of rational thinking. Secondly, developmental psychologists view this stage in the growth of human beings as being a beneficiary of various external factors. At this stage, juveniles tend to associate themselves with group thinking, and this may be a negative factor that may lead to such extreme cases of murder. Thirdly, at this age, a juveniles’ character is still undergoing development. It, therefore, becomes difficult to determine one's goals of engaging in a particular action. Considering that someone who has not attained maturity exhibits unpredictable behavior that may arise because of emotional imbalances. Unlike an adult who has achieved stability in character, and his motives can be evaluated on the basis of his past conduct. It would, therefore, be difficult for punishment to transform the behavior of such an individual. Considering that the psychological state of the offender shows lower levels of conscience, and he will not be able to connect the relationship between his actions and the punishment.
Reasons for the dissenting opinion in the Supreme Court judgement
The leading judge among the dissenting judges contradicted the majorities view because he said that it was wrong to claim that juveniles were not in a position to make rational decisions. He said that it the American Psychological Association had shown that juveniles had enough conscience to decide whether to procure an abortion or not devoid of any parental guidance (Roper V. Simmons p.2). This evidence is related to the Hodgson v/s Minnesota case. He argued that if a juvenile had the ability to contemplate an abortion that is more serious than cold blood murder, it was, therefore, sustainable for such a juvenile to serve a death sentence. He also cited that, "it was a fallacy for the majority to consider that since most states did not allow juveniles to participate in activities considered to be for the adults it made them lesser peop...