« The Era of Big Government ? | Main | Best of The Redhunter »
March 1, 2005
Who's Court?
The Supreme Court handed down a decision today that essentially said that executing people who committed their crimes while a juvenile was unconstitutional, violating the eighth amendment against cruel and unusual punishment.
Ok, fair enough. Maybe it's the right decision, maybe the wrong one. Reasonable people can disagree.
But then one read's the court's reasoning:
Justice Kennedy (who wrote the majority decision) relied on international law and practice to "confirm" his view that the juvenile death penalty constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. He also cited the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which the U.S. signed only subject to the reservation of its right to impose the death penalty for crimes committed by persons below eighteen years of age.
It is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international opinion against the juvenile death penalty, resting in large part on the understanding that the instability and emotional imbalance of young people may often be a factor in the crime.Un, no, it's not proper, justice. You are on the United States Supreme Court. The law that you are to base your decisions on is the Constitution.
But we have even worse from the good justice
When a juvenile offender commits a heinous crime, the state can exact forfeiture of some of the most basic liberties, but the state cannot extinguish his life and his potential to attain a mature understanding of his own humanity.
To which Mark Levin retorts
All those gang members under the age of 18, some of the most vicious murderers known to law enforcement, will be pleased with this ruling. After they murder, they will now have time to "attain a mature understanding of (their) own humanity.
Look, as I said at the beginning, maybe the death penalty is good, maybe not. Maybe we should keep it for minors and maybe not. Reasonable people can disagree. But I will not have our Supreme Court justices making their decisions on "international law" or "world opinion." It's hard to overstate the importance of the next appointments to the bench.
And oh, I heard on the radio that beltway sniper suspect Lee Malvo's attorney was "elated" by the decision.
Posted by Tom at March 1, 2005 4:12 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.theredhunter.com/mt/refer.cgi/342
