Wednesday, June 25, 2008

The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child.

SCOTUS Decision. Should be the first question asked to Obama in the upcoming debates as we will get more Justices like Kennedy. SCOTUS would probably have rule for the death penalty if the rape occurred during a gay wedding.

What the rapist did via Malkin.


Adam said...

There's nothing in the Constitution about about proportional justice, and this precedent can now easily extend itself beyond death penalty cases into jail sentences. Someone can appeal a life sentence as "unproportional" to their crime. Unproportional now = unconstitutional?! Problem is that there's no clear definition of what is a "proportional" punishment, unless we just do it all on an "eye for an eye" system. Those same robes would probably deem such as too cruel.

mc said...

They realize that their vote stands. They only remotely worry about justifying their vote. In this instance he invoked some nebulous notion of "proportionality." In the recent past they have invoked foreign law and "evolving standards." We are their children and they rule on that premise, the concept of paternalism/maternalism. In no way should the concept of language, logic and reason be confused with their methodology.

"Hi, I am a supreme court justice and I vote to uphold this decision. My reasons include spanky inca and bruno. Lest I resort to mentioning right angles and dolphin flippers."

The result is the same no matter what the justification once you leave the logic reservation, and they will not fear the response at their cocktail parties.