In addition to the United States, the nations with laws allowing the execution of minors include such progressive places as China, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran. In this country there are 19 states, including Kentucky, that allow executions of defendants under 18. There are 70 such defendants now on death rows around the country awaiting execution.

We're talking about teenagers who can't legally drink, vote, join the army or be on juries because society says they don't yet have the maturity to do those things.

This is an obscene inconsistency - one that only the Supreme Court can end with a ruling in the case of Christopher Simmons. There is nothing sympathetic about Simmons. In 1993, Simmons, then 17, and an accomplice burglarized the home of Shirley Crook. When the victim recognized them, they bound her with duct tape, tossed her in a car and drove around for about an hour before tossing the terrified and still bound woman off of a bridge. Simmons was sentenced to death, but the Missouri Supreme Court overturned the sentence last year. His younger accomplice got life.

The question isn't whether the death of Shirley Crook was horrible, or whether Christopher Simmons is an unrepentant monster. The question is whether executing a minor is cruel and unusual punishment because a minor does not have the maturity to think or act like an adult. Two years ago the court used similar reasoning in a 6-3 decision that outlawed executing defendants who are mentally retarded. The court already has barred executions of those who committed crimes when they were under 16.

During arguments Wednesday, justices noted the opinions of many world leaders, Nobel laureates and diplomats who urged them to ban juvenile executions. Judge Ruth Bader Ginsburg quoted from the Declaration of Independence, which says the United States should "show a decent respect for the opinions of mankind."

We should not stand alone in the world on this issue.