Another stab at the Constitution

“The Constitution has failed to check this pathological process. The Eighth Amendment bans “cruel and unusual punishments”. And the requirement that a sentence be “unusual” has meant that the justices often do little more than count up states with similar sentences without looking at how states reached these outcome.”

In this quote by Racheal E Barkow from her “New York Times” article Revisiting the Constitution: Clarify What’s Cruel and Unusual Punishment, she believes prison uses punishment excessively. People are sentenced to prison and treated how ever the authority figures there, which are the correction officers the way they see fit. Also the judge that gave the sentence doesn’t see it through, therefore the authority figures take it into their own hands. Often the punishment crosses the line and become “ cruel and unusual”. This occurs despite what the Eighth Amendment bans. This is what I understood this quote meant.

I chose this quote because I disagree with Racheal E Barkow. I believe that different people have different views and beliefs therefore the Eighth Amendment shouldn’t be “clarified”. She didn’t specify in this article what exactly was going on that made prisons “cruel and unusual”, she didn’t support this article with any evidence, not even one example. In the judicial system when a crime is committed the judge and sometime the jury decide on the sentence if the person is proven guilty. They take all the evidence into consideration and the person is sentenced according to the crime they committed. I don’t believe someone that kills another person and gets sentenced 25 to life “cruel and unusual punishment”. Actually now the corrections department is trying to decrease jail time by offering rehab to people who are charged with drugs to prostitution, instead of jail time. If the Eighth Amendment is re-written it will leave too much room for speculation because everyone had they’re own perspective. They have their own beliefs and even though they try to not incorporate their beliefs in decision-making especially in politics it usual fails. Most of the time they do put their own beliefs onto others. Who is todays government to define “cruel and unusual punishment” when we have come so far from 1787, they didn’t have the weapons or resources we have now, they had less back then so I say leave it alone!

There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence, the other by giving to every citizen the same opinions, 5 he same passions, and 53 same interests. 


It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires. But it could not be less folly to abolish liberty, which is essential to political life, because it nourishes faction, than it would be to wish the annihilation of air, which is essential to animal life because its imparts to fire its destructive agency.

These paragraphs come from the article “The Federalist No. 10” by James Madison. The first paragraph is talking about ways to remove faction which is defined as a small, organized, dissenting group within a larger one, especially in politics or a state of conflict within an organization; dissension. One of the ways that faction could be destroyed is by destroying freedom, because without freedom there would be no faction. The other way to destroy faction would be to make everyone the same, force them ALL to have the same interests and beliefs, similar to a dictatorship. But in this case the cure for the problem is worse than the actual disease. The writer makes an example of the importance of freedom to faction by comparing it to the bon between air and fire. The bond between the two is very important, without air there would be no fire and without freedom there will be no faction, hence they can’t exist. Faction plays a big role in politics. If air doesn’t exist there would be no fire, which may be a good this but there also wouldn’t be any life, which isn’t a good thing. Its just like if the government gets rid of freedom, yes it would be getting rid of politics and faction but it will make life not worth living.

These paragraphs are important to me because I believe freedom is very important. I grew up the only girl out of four boys, and my older brother was very overprotective. While my brothers where able to go outside and do whatever they wanted I was to stay home, when I went to school I had to go straight home, until I was 16 years old then I got a 9pm curfew. A few months after I turned 18years old I rebelled and I moved out of my house. So if freedom is taken from all of us, it will cause people to rebel. We need our freedom and like James Madison said air is essential to life, freedom is essential to life also. Yes this will also keep faction and politics alive too but it’s worth it. The government of the United States of America has created a system that allows people to choose their own parties and if that means debate then so be it. Rather than have no freedom, no faction and hence no politics. It’s worth keeping it all rather than loosing FREEDOM.