Carol Steiker

They sent like a kind of sort of form of freedom riders. They sent a bunch of young people down to the south to go to courthouses. This is before computers. If you wanted to find evidence about cases, you had to go to the courthouses and pull records.

They sent like a kind of sort of form of freedom riders. They sent a bunch of young people down to the south to go to courthouses. This is before computers. If you wanted to find evidence about cases, you had to go to the courthouses and pull records.

And they sent teams of young people down to southern courthouses to try to build a record about the racially discriminatory use of the death penalty.

And they sent teams of young people down to southern courthouses to try to build a record about the racially discriminatory use of the death penalty.

And they sent teams of young people down to southern courthouses to try to build a record about the racially discriminatory use of the death penalty.

But as this litigation campaign picked up speed, they began to throw everything at the wall, every argument they could think of against the death penalty. And one of the big arguments was standards of decency have evolved.

But as this litigation campaign picked up speed, they began to throw everything at the wall, every argument they could think of against the death penalty. And one of the big arguments was standards of decency have evolved.

But as this litigation campaign picked up speed, they began to throw everything at the wall, every argument they could think of against the death penalty. And one of the big arguments was standards of decency have evolved.

In the 1960s, the death penalty was much more broadly authorized than it is today. Like I've already said, you could get it for rape in addition to murder, but you could also get it in some states for armed robbery, for kidnapping, for arson. So it was very broadly authorized. And juries decide whether the death penalty should be imposed, not judges.

In the 1960s, the death penalty was much more broadly authorized than it is today. Like I've already said, you could get it for rape in addition to murder, but you could also get it in some states for armed robbery, for kidnapping, for arson. So it was very broadly authorized. And juries decide whether the death penalty should be imposed, not judges.

In the 1960s, the death penalty was much more broadly authorized than it is today. Like I've already said, you could get it for rape in addition to murder, but you could also get it in some states for armed robbery, for kidnapping, for arson. So it was very broadly authorized. And juries decide whether the death penalty should be imposed, not judges.

And they were given no instructions whatsoever about who should get the death penalty. They were simply told, it is in your sole discretion, according to your conscience, whether to impose death or life or sometimes a lesser punishment. And so that was thought to be a due process problem, that there wasn't any guidance to the juries about who should get the death penalty and who shouldn't.

And they were given no instructions whatsoever about who should get the death penalty. They were simply told, it is in your sole discretion, according to your conscience, whether to impose death or life or sometimes a lesser punishment. And so that was thought to be a due process problem, that there wasn't any guidance to the juries about who should get the death penalty and who shouldn't.

And they were given no instructions whatsoever about who should get the death penalty. They were simply told, it is in your sole discretion, according to your conscience, whether to impose death or life or sometimes a lesser punishment. And so that was thought to be a due process problem, that there wasn't any guidance to the juries about who should get the death penalty and who shouldn't.

And then... Astoundingly, they ruled in favor of the claim that the death penalty was being applied in a way that violated the Eighth Amendment.

And then... Astoundingly, they ruled in favor of the claim that the death penalty was being applied in a way that violated the Eighth Amendment.

And then... Astoundingly, they ruled in favor of the claim that the death penalty was being applied in a way that violated the Eighth Amendment.

The headline in the New York Times that announced that decision was the same banner as had announced men landing on the moon three years previously in 1969. It was that big a deal and that much of a surprise. Like, nobody thought that that's what was going to happen, but that's what happened.

The headline in the New York Times that announced that decision was the same banner as had announced men landing on the moon three years previously in 1969. It was that big a deal and that much of a surprise. Like, nobody thought that that's what was going to happen, but that's what happened.

The headline in the New York Times that announced that decision was the same banner as had announced men landing on the moon three years previously in 1969. It was that big a deal and that much of a surprise. Like, nobody thought that that's what was going to happen, but that's what happened.