Ingraham v. Wright

Last updated

Ingraham v. Wright
Seal of the United States Supreme Court.svg
Argued November 2–3, 1976
Decided April 19, 1977
Full case nameIngraham, et al., v. Wright, et al.
Citations430 U.S. 651 ( more )
97 S. Ct. 1401; 51 L. Ed. 2d 711
Argument Oral argument
Reargument Reargument
Opinion announcement Opinion announcement
Holding
The cruel and unusual punishment clause of the Eighth Amendment did not apply to corporal punishment as a disciplinary practice in public schools, and the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment did not require notice or a hearing prior to imposition of such punishment, as the state's laws authorized the practice and allowed common law constraints and remedies. The primary purpose of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause has always been considered, and properly so, to be directed at the method or kind of punishment imposed for the violation of criminal statutes. When public school teachers or administrators impose disciplinary corporal punishment, the Eight Amendment is inapplicable (lexisnexis)
Court membership
Chief Justice
Warren E. Burger
Associate Justices
William J. Brennan Jr.  · Potter Stewart
Byron White  · Thurgood Marshall
Harry Blackmun  · Lewis F. Powell Jr.
William Rehnquist  · John P. Stevens
Case opinions
MajorityPowell, joined by Burger, Stewart, Blackmun, Rehnquist
DissentWhite, joined by Brennan, Marshall, Stevens
DissentStevens
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amends. VIII, XIV

Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977), was a United States Supreme Court case that upheld the disciplinary corporal punishment policy of Florida's public schools by a 5-4 vote. The judgment specified that such corporal punishments have no prohibition in public schools unless those punishments are “degrading or unduly severe”. [1] [2] [3]

Contents

Background

James Ingraham was a 14-year-old eighth grade student at Charles R. Drew Junior High School [4] in 1970. On October 6, 1970, Ingraham was accused of failing to promptly leave the stage of the school auditorium when asked to do so by a teacher. [5] He was then taken to the school principal's office, where he stated that he was not guilty of the accusation against him. Willie J. Wright, Jr., the principal, ordered Ingraham to bend over so that Wright could spank Ingraham with a spanking paddle. When Ingraham declined to bend over and allow himself to be paddled, he was forcibly placed face-down on the top of a table. Lemmie Deliford, the assistant principal, held Ingraham's arms and Solomon Barnes, an assistant to the principal, held Ingraham's legs. While Ingraham was being restrained, Wright used a spanking paddle to hit Ingraham more than 20 times.

The paddling was so severe that he suffered a hematoma requiring medical attention. Physicians instructed Ingraham to rest at home for a total of eleven days. [6] He and his parents sued the school, calling it "cruel and unusual punishment" and loss of liberty, but lost the initial trial. The Florida state court held that Florida tort laws provided sufficient remedies to satisfy Ingraham's due process loss of liberty claims. The court also held that the U.S. Constitution's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment does not apply to the corporal punishment of children in public schools, and that the constitution's due process clause does not require notice and a hearing prior to the imposition of corporal punishment in public schools.

Opinion of the Court

The Supreme Court declined to consider the plaintiffs' substantive due process claims in Ingraham v. Wright. Lower courts have adopted a variety of approaches to the substantive due process issue, none of which offer much protection for students who are subjected to corporal punishment at school. The Supreme Court has repeatedly denied certiorari (judicial review) on the issue of whether school corporal punishment constitutes a substantive due process constitutional violation. [7]

As of 1994, Lemmie Deliford, one of the administrators involved, was still a proponent of corporal punishment in schools. [8]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution</span> 1791 amendment regulating forms of punishment

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution protects against imposing excessive bail, excessive fines, or cruel and unusual punishments. This amendment was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the United States Bill of Rights. The amendment serves as a limitation upon the state or federal government to impose unduly harsh penalties on criminal defendants before and after a conviction. This limitation applies equally to the price for obtaining pretrial release and the punishment for crime after conviction. The phrases in this amendment originated in the English Bill of Rights of 1689.

Due process of law is application by the state of all legal rules and principles pertaining to a case so all legal rights that are owed to a person are respected. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Byron White</span> US Supreme Court justice and pro football player (1917–2002)

Byron Raymond "Whizzer" White was an American lawyer, jurist, and professional football player who served as an associate justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1962 until 1993. By his retirement, he was its only sitting Democrat and the last-living member of the progressive Warren Court.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Spanking</span> Corporal punishment of striking the buttocks

Spanking is a form of corporal punishment involving the act of striking, with either the palm of the hand or an implement, the buttocks of a person to cause physical pain. The term spanking broadly encompasses the use of either the hand or implement, the use of implements can also refer to the administration of more specific types of corporal punishment such as caning, paddling and slippering.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporal punishment</span> Punishment intended to cause physical pain

A corporal punishment or a physical punishment is a punishment which is intended to cause physical pain to a person. When it is inflicted on minors, especially in home and school settings, its methods may include spanking or paddling. When it is inflicted on adults, it may be inflicted on prisoners and slaves.

A Due Process Clause is found in both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution, which prohibit the deprivation of "life, liberty, or property" by the federal and state governments, respectively, without due process of law.

Robinson v. California, 370 U.S. 660 (1962), is the first landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution was interpreted to prohibit criminalization of particular acts or conduct, as contrasted with prohibiting the use of a particular form of punishment for a crime. In Robinson, the Court struck down a California law that criminalized being addicted to narcotics.

A spanking paddle is an implement used to strike a person on the buttocks. The act of spanking a person with a paddle is known as "paddling". A paddling may be for punishment, or as an initiation or hazing ritual.

<i>Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v Canada (AG)</i> Supreme Court of Canada case

Canadian Foundation for Children, Youth and the Law v Canada (AG), [2004] 1 S.C.R. 76, 2004 SCC 4 – known also as the spanking case – is a leading Charter decision of the Supreme Court of Canada where the Court upheld section 43 of the Criminal Code that allowed for a defence of reasonable use of force by way of correction towards children as not in violation of section 7, section 12 or section 15(1) of the Charter.

Section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as part of the Constitution of Canada, is a legal rights section that protects an individual's freedom from cruel and unusual punishments in Canada. The section has generated some case law, including the essential case R. v. Smith (1987), in which it was partially defined, and R. v. Latimer (2001), a famous case in which Saskatchewan farmer Robert Latimer protested that his long, mandatory minimum sentence for the murder of his disabled daughter was cruel and unusual.

Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., 532 U.S. 424 (2001), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court involving the standard of review that Federal Appeal Courts should use when examining punitive damages awards.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Strapping (punishment)</span> Type of corporal punishment

Strapping refers to the use of a strap as an implement of corporal punishment. It is typically a broad and heavy strip of leather, often with a hard handle, the more flexible 'blade' being applied to the offender.

<i>Jackson v. Bishop</i>

Jackson v. Bishop, 404 F.2d 571 was a case decided in 1968 on the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States by then-judge Harry Blackmun. It abolished corporal punishment in the Arkansas prison system.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School corporal punishment</span> Form of punishment

School corporal punishment is the deliberate infliction of physical pain as a response to undesired behavior by students. The term corporal punishment derives from the Latin word for the "body", corpus. In schools it may involve striking the student on the buttocks or on the palms of their hands with an implement such as a rattan cane, wooden paddle, slipper, leather strap or wooden yardstick. Less commonly, it could also include spanking or smacking the student with an open hand, especially at the kindergarten, primary school, or other more junior levels.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporal punishment in the home</span> Form of punishment used by parents to inflict physical pain or discomfort

Physical or corporal punishment by a parent or other legal guardian is any act causing deliberate physical pain or discomfort to a minor child in response to some undesired behavior. It typically takes the form of spanking or slapping the child with an open hand or striking with an implement such as a belt, slipper, cane, hairbrush or paddle, whip, hanger, and can also include shaking, pinching, forced ingestion of substances, or forcing children to stay in uncomfortable positions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Campaigns against corporal punishment</span>

Campaigns against corporal punishment aim to reduce or eliminate corporal punishment of minors by instigating legal and cultural changes in the areas where such punishments are practiced. Such campaigns date mostly from the late 20th century, although occasional voices in opposition to corporal punishment existed from ancient times through to the modern era.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">School corporal punishment in the United States</span> United States corporal punishment in schools

Corporal punishment, sometimes referred to as "physical punishment" or "physical discipline", has been defined as the use of physical force, no matter how light, to cause deliberate bodily pain or discomfort in response to undesired behavior. In schools in the United States, corporal punishment takes the form of a school teacher or administrator striking a student's buttocks with a wooden paddle.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Corporal punishment of minors in the United States</span> Infliction of pain or discomfort on minors as punishment

Corporal punishment of minors in the United States, meaning the infliction of physical pain or discomfort by parents or other adult guardians, including in some cases school officials, for purposes of punishing unacceptable attitude, is subject to varying legal limits, depending on the state. Minor children in the United States commonly experience some form of corporal punishment, such as spanking or paddling. Despite opposition from medical and social-services professionals, as of 2024, the spanking of children is legal in all 50 states and, as of 2014, most people still believe it is acceptable provided it does not involve implements. Corporal punishment is in the United States usually considered distinct from illegal child abuse, although the distinction can often be vague.

The legality of corporal punishment of children varies by country. Corporal punishment of minor children by parents or adult guardians, which is intended to cause physical pain, has been traditionally legal in nearly all countries unless explicitly outlawed. According to a 2014 estimate by Human Rights Watch, "Ninety percent of the world's children live in countries where corporal punishment and other physical violence against children is still legal". Many countries' laws provide for a defence of "reasonable chastisement" against charges of assault and other crimes for parents using corporal punishment. This defence is ultimately derived from English law. As of 2024, only three of seven G7 members including seven of the 20 G20 member states have banned the use of corporal punishment against children.

Moore v. Texas, 137 S. Ct. 1039 (2017), is a United States Supreme Court decision about the death penalty and intellectual disability. The court held that contemporary clinical standards determine what an intellectual disability is, and held that even milder forms of intellectual disability may bar a person from being sentenced to death due to the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The case clarified two earlier cases, Atkins v. Virginia (2002) and Hall v. Florida (2014).

References

  1. "Ingraham v. Wright". Oyez. Retrieved October 13, 2021.
  2. "Ingraham v. Wright, 430 U.S. 651 (1977)". Justia Law. Retrieved May 18, 2021.
  3. Rosenberg, Irene Merker (1978). "Ingraham v. Wright: The Supreme Court's Whipping Boy". Columbia Law Review. 78 (1): 75–110. doi:10.2307/1121951. ISSN   0010-1958. JSTOR   1121951.
  4. Charles R. Drew Junior High School is today known as Charles R. Drew Middle School.
  5. Virginia Lee (1979). "A Legal Analysis of Ingraham v. Wright". In Corporal Punishment in American Education: Readings in History, Practice, and Alternatives. Irwin A. Hyman and James H. Wise, editors. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Temple University Press. Page 173.
  6. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit; 498 F.2d 248, paragraph 29, July 29, 1974.
  7. Deana Pollard Sacks (2009). "State Actors Beating Children: A Call For Judicial Relief." University of California Davis Law Review, Archived 2011-05-02 at the Wayback Machine 42, pp. 1165—1229.
  8. "Miami-Dade educator Lemmie Deliford Sr. dies at 83". Miami Herald. Retrieved March 17, 2018.