Which case reaffirmed the constitutionality of death penalty procedures under revised state laws?

• A. Furman v. Georgia (1972)
• B. Gregg v. Georgia (1976)
• C. Atkins v. Virginia (2002)
• D. Roper v. Simmons (2005)

Answer: (B)

The key idea is how courts treat death penalty procedures after a ruling that struck down existing statutes for arbitrariness. Furman v. Georgia found the death penalty unconstitutional in its then-current form because its application was arbitrary. States then revised their laws to add safeguards—such as a two-stage process (guilt phase, then a separate sentencing phase with guided discretion), defined aggravating and mitigating factors, and automatic appellate review. Gregg v. Georgia upheld these revised procedures, showing that the death penalty could be constitutional when administered under carefully designed guidelines and with review to prevent arbitrariness. This is why it’s the best answer: it directly addresses whether the death penalty can be constitutional under revised state procedures, not about who may be executed. By contrast, Atkins v. Virginia and Roper v. Simmons address limitations on who can be sentenced to death (intellectually disabled and juveniles, respectively), and Furman v. Georgia addressed the invalidation that preceded revisions.