26 of 30 - The Recent SCOTUS Decision
Jun. 26th, 2008 08:40 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So the news today is that the US Supreme Court has ruled that applying the death penalty to anything other than a death-causing crime violates the Constitution's ban on "cruel and unusual punishment."
My feelings on this are that irregardless as to whether or not as a matter of policy it is advisable to execute people under various circumstances, there is no indication that this is the intended application of "cruel and unusual" in the Constitution. What I'm saying is that I think its preposterous to say that the Constitution somehow forbids this by the use of the words "cruel and unusual punishment."
I am well aware that the recent SCOTUS decision was based on precedents set by thousands of previous cases which had slowly changed what the Constitution is alleged to mean, and following precedence is important. But precedence should only be a guide to how things have been interpreted from the original law, and that should be kept in mind. The original law should not be modified and modified and modified by precedent until its something unrecognizable.
And now I've got to run to Bevmo before it closes in fifteen minutes. O=
no subject
Date: 2008-06-27 05:32 am (UTC)I can't believe you just used that (non-)word.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-27 09:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-28 05:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-06-27 06:15 am (UTC)It does seem that there are crimes worse than murder; so one might make them capital crimes. But I find it hard to get too upset about a new restriction on capital punishment, given that I don't think the state should be in the business of killing people in the first place.
no subject
Date: 2008-06-27 08:04 am (UTC)