Module 3 describes the legal challenges to the death penalty beginning in the 1960s. When on the U.S. Supreme Court declared the death penalty unconstitutional, the public backlash to the decision was overwhelming and swift. Only four years after Furman, the Court reversed itself and reinstated capital punishment. The Court approved capital punishment statutes that the majority believed would rid the death penalty of the problems cited in its Furman decision. Based on the death-is-different principle, the Court approved what would be called "super due process," a guided discretion process requiring juries to consider aggravating and mitigating evidence presented during the sentencing phase of a bifurcated trial. In addition, super due process included automatic appeal or direct review usually of both the conviction and the sentence and proportionality review, though neither process is constitutionally required. The Court's majority believed that the super due process would eliminate problems cited in Furman. 1. The Court has set forth conditions for consideration of aggravating and mitigating circumstances that help to guide the consideration of sentencing and the death penalty. Should aggravating and mitigating circumstances even be considered, or should it just be about the crime that was committed that determine the death penalty