Citation

Finkel NJ. Behav. Sci. Law 1993; 11(1): 67-77.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1993, John Wiley and Sons)

DOI

10.1002/bsl.2370110106

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In Stanford v. Kentucky, in which two juveniles sentenced to death raised an Eighth Amendment challenge, Justice Scalia's plurality opinion set the ground rules for deciding juvenile death penalty cases. He ruled "socioscientific"︁ evidence and philosopher-king decisions out of bounds. Scalia argued that the Court must do its own social science analysis of the objective indicia to gauge whether community sentiment finds such a punishment cruel and unusual. In determining whether a "national consensus"︁ exists, Justice Scalia transformed the empirical question into an impossible question, requiring that a categorical aversion must be shown. Petitioners lost, but so too did social science jurisprudence, as "statistical magic"︁ and "numerology"︁ reigned supreme.

Language: en