Cruel and Unusual Punishment

It’s Friday, everybody, so let’s lighten the mood with cruel and unusual punishment.

Don’t worry, it’s not as bad as it sounds. No, today we look at a simple two-axis plot or matrix used by Jon Stewart to classify means of death and whether or not they would unconstitutional based on the cruel and unusual clause.

The Cruel and Unusual Punishment Matrix
The Cruel and Unusual Punishment Matrix

Credit for the piece goes to the Daily Show’s graphics department.

Potential Voting Rights Act Impacts

Last Thursday we looked at the impact of potential outcomes by an expected Supreme Court ruling on two gar marriage cases. (We’re still waiting, probably until this Thursday, though it could be today.) Today, we look at the impact of potential outcomes of another big case before the Court, the Voting Rights Act. Broadly (and quickly), Shelby County, Alabama is challenging the federal government, which according to the act, must approve any changes to electoral law in those places that have had problems in their history of disenfranchising black citizens (and more recently non-English speaking citizens, i.e. Hispanics). The act was renewed for 25 years by President Bush back in 2006.

The New York Times explains through interactive maps first the geographic scope of this federal approval. As one might expect, it significantly impacts southern states. But the rules used to determine that coverage are decades old.

Current coverage
Current coverage

But if the current process must change, several different metrics by which alternative coverage could be determined would offer different coverage. The New York Times allows user to see those different metrics, and then adjust filters to fine tune those areas covered. A nice feature for all of these views is the ability to show/hide those areas under the current coverage.

Using prejudice to define coverage
Using prejudice to define coverage

Credit for the piece goes to the New York Times graphics department.

The Case Against Jerry Sandusky

Penn State is going through some rough times. The charges against Jerry Sandusky are most serious and the failure to do more than the legal requirement in reporting him has cost the university president his job and head coach Joe Paterno his job. Anyone familiar with the school or Paterno’s prior standing in the state—as I am as both a former student at Penn State and nearly life-long resident of Pennsylvania—is shocked/gutted/upset about what has happened.

The Washington Post, in an attempt to make sense of the charges against Sandusky, created this graphic explaining the timeline of the allegations and actions taken by principle players.

An infographic outlining the allegations made against Jerry Sandusky
An infographic outlining the allegations made against Jerry Sandusky

Credit for the piece goes to Bonnie Berkowitz and Laura Stanton of the Washington Post.