The U.S. Supreme Court case Ronald Allen Harmelin v. Michigan in 1990 revolved around the issue of whether a mandatory life sentence without parole for possession of more than 650 grams of cocaine was a violation of the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The court ruled in favor of Michigan, with a majority opinion stating that severe, mandatory penalties may be cruel but not always unusual in the constitutional sense because they have been employed throughout history to deter serious crimes. This ruling upheld Harmelin's conviction and life sentence without possibility for parole, asserting that it did not violate his Eighth Amendment rights as long as it is proportionate to the crime committed.

In the dissenting opinion for Ronald Allen Harmelin v. Michigan, Justice White argued that the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment should apply to non-capital sentences as well. He contended that a mandatory life sentence without parole for possession of 672 grams of cocaine was grossly disproportionate to the crime committed and therefore unconstitutional. The justice believed there should be an individualized consideration in sentencing, taking into account factors such as prior criminal history or lack thereof, which were not considered in this case due to Michigan’s strict drug laws at the time. Furthermore, he pointed out inconsistencies between states' punishments for similar crimes and suggested that these disparities indicate a national consensus against harsh penalties like Harmelin's.