Following an examination of court decisions and issues relating to capital punishment, the societal benefits that proponents attribute to capital punishment are examined, and alternative and more humane approaches to fulfill the needs of a moral society are described. Various ways in which justice may miscarry and systematic defects in the operation of the criminal justice system are then considered in terms of their implications for capital punishment. While the deterrence of crime is acknowledged as a socially valued function of punishment, the deterrence effectiveness of the death penalty is critically assessed with reference to studies in this area. In addition to a discussion of the relationship between morality and law, a critical analysis of constitutional theories arising in recent U.S. Supreme Court capital punishment decisions is presented. It is argued that to be moral, capital punishment must meet four conditions: It must better protect society than other alternatives, better restore the order of justice and the solidarity of the community breached by the offender, ensure that innocents are not unwittingly executed, and be imposed with scrupulous fairness. Data verify that through the death penalty, none of these purposes have been or are now being met. Projection from experience and an analysis of social institutions lead to the conclusion that these purposes will not be met in the future. Chapter summaries and study questions, index, and 101 references.