The dissenting opinion on the court ruling was given by Justice Scalia, who was joined by chief justice Rehnquist and Justice Thomas. According to them, the court made the substitutes of its judgment for people’s opinions to outlaw the death penalty for children aged below 18 years. The decision by the court was said to be contrary to the original eighth amendment of Alexander Hamilton, where imposing the death penalty depended on the judgment of the court. According to Scalia, the court ought to have adhered to the original meaning of the US constitution and original provisions of the Eighth Amendment, unlike dwelling on the evolvement of the standards of decency. According to Roper v. Simmons (2005), the dissenting opinion was also based on the court not being autonomous in its judgment but instead using opinions and subjective views of other legislatures and courts for its decision making. The fact that the execution of juvenile for the capital offense is infrequent in many states in the country, their incidents that cannot be overlooked like Simmons crime as he committed knowing he could have favor from law considering he was a minor.
