In Furman v. Georgia, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed the constitutionality of the death penalty amid growing concerns about its arbitrary application. The Court held that the way the capital punishment was imposed violated the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, ruling it as cruel and unusual punishment. This case was a culmination of various cases challenging the death penalty, brought forward in a time of social upheaval regarding civil rights and justice reform.

William Furman, a Black man accused of murder, was sentenced to death in Georgia under a system that lacked consistent standards. His case exemplified the broader issues of racial discrimination and socioeconomic disparities in the legal system. The Supreme Court's decision resulted in a 5-4 ruling, affirming that the death penalty's implementation across different states lacked uniformity, raising questions about its fairness and reliability. Consequently, this decision led to a de facto moratorium on the death penalty in the United States, as many states reevaluated their capital punishment statutes.

The ruling in Furman v. Georgia prompted several states to revise their death penalty laws to ensure fair implementation. The majority opinion did not abolish the death penalty outright but signaled the necessity for stringent guidelines around its use. This judicial action was pivotal in launching a broader movement toward criminal justice reform and fueled public debate about the morality and effectiveness of capital punishment in the United States.