Final answer:
Self-defense is typically an exception to animal cruelty laws, with this being based on the right to self-preservation. Additionally, the Supreme Court has not deemed the death penalty as inherently cruel and unusual but restricts its use on minors.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question you have asked relates to the intersection between animal cruelty laws and the concept of self-defense. In legal terms, self-defense is generally considered an exception to animal cruelty laws. This means that if an individual harms an animal in a situation where it is necessary to protect themselves from immediate harm or death, such an action may not be deemed as animal cruelty.
This exception is predicated on the idea of self-preservation, which the law recognizes as a fundamental right. However, it is important to note that the specifics of this can vary depending on jurisdiction and the exact circumstances of the case.
As for the Supreme Court's stance on the death penalty, the correct answer to the question provided is B. is never cruel and unusual punishment and D. may not be applied to those who were under 18 when they committed a crime. The Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty does not inherently constitute cruel and unusual punishment, but it has placed limitations on its application, such as not permitting it for crimes committed by minors.