Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Thompson v. Oklahoma

• 1987 • 487 U.S. 815 • Rehnquist Court
In the case of Thompson v. Oklahoma in 1987, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to execute individuals who were under 16 years old at the time they committed their crimes. The decision came after William Wayne Thompson, who was convicted for a murder he participated in when he was just 15 years old, appealed his death sentence. The court's majority opinion held that executing such young offenders violated "evolving standards of decency" and thus constituted cruel and...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Rehnquist Court
Term: 1987
Docket: 86-6169
487 U.S. 815
108 S. Ct. 2687
101 L. Ed. 2d 702
1988 U.S. LEXIS 3028
Argued: Nov 09, 1987

Thompson v. Oklahoma

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Thompson v. Oklahoma in 1987, the U.S Supreme Court ruled that it was unconstitutional to execute individuals who were under 16 years old at the time they committed their crimes. The decision came after William Wayne Thompson, who was convicted for a murder he participated in when he was just 15 years old, appealed his death sentence. The court's majority opinion held that executing such young offenders violated "evolving standards of decency" and thus constituted cruel and unusual punishment as prohibited by the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution. This ruling set an important precedent regarding juvenile justice and capital punishment laws across America.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for Thompson v. Oklahoma, Justice Scalia argued that there was no historical or contemporary consensus against executing 15-year-olds convicted of murder and thus it should not be considered cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment. He criticized the majority's reliance on psychological and sociological research to determine a juvenile's culpability, arguing that such matters are better left to legislatures rather than courts. Furthermore, he contended that international law should have no bearing on interpreting U.S constitutional provisions. In his view, each state has its own unique moral standards which must be respected by federal courts in determining what constitutes "cruel" or "unusual". Therefore, if a state deems it necessary to impose capital punishment as a deterrent for grave crimes committed by juveniles aged fifteen years old or above then they should have every right to do so without interference from federal authorities.

Opinion written by Justice JPStevens
Decided: Jun 29, 1988
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms