« common sense might prevail | Main | change you can believe in... the same old crap! »
June 25, 2008
the supreme court strikes again
Today the United States Supreme Court ruled on Kennedy v. Louisiana. In a 5-4 decision the court overturned a law in Louisiana that allows the state to execute someone found guilty of child rape. I'm not a huge fan of the death penalty because I am not convinced it acts as a deterrent; however, capital punishment is allowable under the constitution. Today's ruling doesn't make sense. The Court doesn't cite sufficient constitutional grounds to strike down a law that the elected representatives of Louisiana passed. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion and the justification for the ruling is awful
Kennedy's 36 pages of insufferable blather amount to little more than a declaration that the majority doesn't think that capital punishment is ever a fair penalty for the rape of a child--"no matter," as Justice Alito puts it in his dissent, "how young the child, no matter how many times the child is raped, no matter how many children the perpetrator rapes, no matter how sadistic the crime, no matter how much physical or psychological trauma is inflicted, and no matter how heinous the perpetrator's prior criminal record may be."It's obvious that Kennedy, Souter, Stevens, Ginsburg, and Breyer have abandoned the practice of reading the constitution. Kennedy cites a "consensus" of Americans are against the death penalty for the crime of rape. What is he talking about? Did he take a poll? What difference does it make what other states have done? His job as a Justice of the Supreme Court isn't to speculate about a nationwide consensus. If the consensus does in fact exist our elected Congress can pass a law prohibiting the practice. See, that's how the Republic is supposed to work. Our elected leaders are supposed to pass laws and the Supreme Court is supposed to make sure they're constitutional. Unfortunately, now the court creates new law where it doesn't exist. Kennedy should have been impeached for his part in Kelo v. City of New London. The courts ruling on property rights was outrageous and is the number one reason why one more conservative is needed on the bench.
Update: It should be noted that Obama has answered a question about this decision. "I disagree with the decision. I have said narrow circumstances for the most egregious of crimes. The rape of a small child, 6 or 8 years old, is a heinous crime and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances that the death penalty can be pursued, that that does not violate the Constitution."This is a fine answer from the Senator from Illinois; however, an Obama administration would mean more judges like the ones who ruled in the majority today.
Posted by nemov at June 25, 2008 5:34 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.nemov.net/cgi/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2149
Comments
You really have no idea how the Constitution, Local, State, Federal, SCOTUS and the law works do you?
Posted by: BunE at June 30, 2008 2:19 PM