William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal
Abstract
This addresses the frequent use of religious imagery and arguments by both prosecutors and defense attorneys in capital cases. The authors discuss how these emotionally charged arguments are used to sway jurors who are tasked with making life-and-death decisions. The article analyzes judicial responses to such arguments and proposes that prosecutors should be strictly limited in their use of religious rhetoric, while defense attorneys should have more freedom, although not unlimited, in referencing religious themes. These proposals are rooted in the principles of the Eighth Amendment and the rights it grants to capital defendants. The article also evaluates the conflict between different courts’ tolerance of religious arguments and provides guidelines for handling such arguments in a legally sound manner. Ultimately, the authors aim to balance the emotional and moral weight of religious references while maintaining the constitutional fairness required in capital sentencing.
