Final answer:
Witherspoon excludable refers to jurors who are dismissed from capital cases due to their strong objections to the death penalty, while a juror who would automatically vote for death may also be dismissed for not being impartial. The Supreme Court has laid down several limitations on the death penalty, considering factors like intellectual disabilities, age, and the nature of the crime.
Step-by-step explanation:
The term "Witherspoon excludable" refers to potential jurors who would be automatically excluded from serving on a jury in a capital case because they hold such strong objections to the death penalty that they would not be able to consider it as a sentencing option, regardless of the evidence presented. This concept originates from the U.S. Supreme Court case Witherspoon v. Illinois. On the other hand, a juror who would automatically vote for death may also be excluded on the basis that they would not be able to fairly consider all sentencing options. This is in line with the Eighth Amendment that prohibits cruel and unusual punishment and ensures that the imposition of the death penalty follows a legal process that respects the rights of the defendant.
As shown in cases such as Atkins v. Virginia and Woodson v. North Carolina, the Supreme Court has put certain limits on the death penalty, including for those with intellectual disabilities, individuals who were minors at the time the crime was committed, and cases where the crime did not result in death. These decisions spotlight the continuous efforts by the courts to balance the expansion of rights with societal needs and the concept of retribution.