The Supreme Court

B

beenthere

New member
With a 5-4 liberal decision Justice Kennedy announced the execution of Juveniles is no longer legal. The decision was based not on the U.S. Constitution but on International Law and International Sociatal Precedent. How long will it be with liberal courts before International Precedent tosses our 2nd Amendment out the window? How will we and the general populce react?

Will letters to liberal Senators get conservative Justices appointed? Lots of questions - no answers from me.
 
E

Erich

New member
I take it you're not a lawyer.

You need to read the opinion. It was based on Kennedy's interpretation of the U.S. Const.'s provision that bans cruel and unusual punishment. Four other justices agreed with him. Kennedy looked to what other countries do, but not as precedent.

You can agree with the opinion or not (personally, I don't care), but get the facts right before you start freaking out. :)
 
R

Rich Lucibella

Staff
Erich-
Thanks much. I haven't had a chance to read the opinion and was truly blown away by the claim of International Precedent. That would REALLY have been a bad day.

Do you have a cite for the original opinion? (I know I could find it, but I'm doing about 40 things just now and could really use the help.)
Rich
 
B

beenthere

New member
Supreme Court

Sorry if I used the wrong words. I was going from memory of what I read of the AP on Yahoo and the quotes I heard on the radio. Not having legal training naturally make me suspect. I'll just watch and see what happens.
 
K

k_dawg

New member
in all seriousness.. i do not think Kennedy looked to the Constitution to see what "cruel and unusual" is.. but rather, he simply just pulled an age out of his ass.
 
S

shootinstudent

New member
i do not think Kennedy looked to the Constitution to see what "cruel and unusual" is.. but rather, he simply just pulled an age out of his ass.
Click to expand...

How exactly would you go about looking to the constitution to see what "cruel and unusual" means?

The Constitution doesn't contain a lexicon with intricate definitions for its terms. You need to think about what words mean to understand it. I haven't read the opinion yet, so I won't comment on that specifically.

Rich, I would assume Erich is right on...the Court did the same thing in the Lawrence v. Texas decision not too long ago. They will cite foreign law from time to time as an example of something like "community standard" in understanding the law.
 
K

k_dawg

New member
Kennedy didn't even have the guts to explain how and why they "got it wrong" in '88

even the THOUGHT of explaining that makes his skin crawl
 
Last edited by a moderator:
P

paratrooper

New member
I would think that a good "cruel and unusual" punishment meaning would be more than the perp did to the victim . So if they got the same brutality shown to them as they showed to the vic that would go with "turnabout is fair play".Now for the bonus round . I see the SCOTUS is wrapped up in a hell of a deal right now . Church and State . 10 Commandments on public property being scritinized by a group of folks that open their sessions with "May God Save This Court". It would be hypocritical for them to remove the 10 when it's the same God they call on . If they DO remove them then they are no longer credibile to me and their opinions are a non issue from now until they redeem themselves . It seems ironic but they are in a position right now where only God can save them . :D
 
K

k_dawg

New member
IMHO: preventing justice to be served is "cruel and unusual" for society as a whole. But then, our liberal court system worries too much about the perp, and not enough ( anything?? ) about the victims.
 
R

Rojoe67

New member
This might be a little off track.......but our money states in God We Trust....will the mint have to remove that off our bills and coins? And when you put the hand on the Bible and proclaim to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God...... and the list goes on.

As far as those considered too young to put to death for crimes against fellow man....... How about the lady that was kidnapped by the teens, tied up with duck tape and thrown into a river to die a most awful death.... My question in this case is why shouldn't the little thugs get the same.......? Don't tell me about cruel and unusual punishment.......This rule change might only apply in 19 states but what message did we just send. Here is another one for ya: Bus driver shot and killed by teen last week. The report said that junior was bad and chewing snuff and got caught the day before. So he got punished and figured heck I will just go kill that bus driver and teach her a lesson. What lesson did junior learn? He found out that if your under 18 you can get away with murder. Oh that's true he will likely get locked up until he is 18 right or is it 21? Either way Junior is saved by the court system. I hope Junior doesn't plan on moving in my neighborhood when he gets out? Oh wait I can't be judgemental cause he was just a messed up minor.........and when he gets out? hmmmmmmm rehabilitation should make him all better and good again........ :barf:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top