User talk:TheBageldude

Due process claims on McGautha v. California article
Hi TheBageldude! I noticed your edit to the article McGautha v. California, changed the Eighth Amendment to Fifth Amendment. While I certainly agree that the Eighth Amendment does not contain a due process claim, looking more at the case text on page 196, the court appears to be addressing a pure Fourteenth Amendment due process claim rather than a Fifth Amendment due process claim when they stated "To fit their arguments within a constitutional frame of reference petitioners contend that to leave the jury completely at large to impose or withhold the death penalty as it sees fit is fundamentally lawless and therefore violates the basic command of the Fourteenth Amendment that no State shall deprive a person of his life without due process of law. Despite the undeniable surface appeal of the proposition, we conclude that the courts below correctly rejected it.'". Bessler (2012), in the article "Tinkering Around the Edges: The Supreme Court's Death Penalty Jurisprudence", states, "In McGautha v. California, the Court first held in 1971 that a jury's imposition of the death penalty without governing standards did not violate the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause", which also seems to lend credence to a pure Fourteenth Amendment claim. I'm not an expert in this area, so I thought I would run it by you first to get your thoughts on whether the case addresses a Fifth Amendment due process claim. Thanks! Wikipedialuva (talk) 03:11, 22 February 2023 (UTC)


 * 14th Amendment makes more sense, you are correct. I think it should be changed to 14th.  I chose fifth without much consideration, just knowing that the 8th does not fit and needed a fix.  14th is better. TheBageldude (talk) 05:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Went ahead and updated the article. Thanks for the fast response! Wikipedialuva (talk) 08:39, 22 February 2023 (UTC)