[eDebate] One more note....RE: Death penalty upheld by S. Ct.
Tue Jun 27 15:42:49 CDT 2006
Here is some UQ cards for you...
This is from the cnn.com article quoting Souter's dissent in the KS Death
"In dissent, Justice David Souter said a state law "that requires execution
when the case for aggravation has failed to convince the sentencing jury is
morally absurd." He added that the majority's holding "that the Constitution
tolerates this moral irrationality defies decades of precedent aimed at
eliminating freakish capital sentencing in the United States.""
>From Breyer's dissent in Hudson
"Today's opinion is thus doubly troubling. It represents a significant
departure from the Court's precedents. And it weakens, perhaps destroys,
much of the practical value of the Constitution's knock-and-announce
NOTE - "defies decades of precedent" and "departure from the Court's
I thought conservative courts were supposed to be "precedent oriented" -
seems like their not so conservative more neocon President its right wing
activism. Shudder folks.
Second note, just like Husdon, this case was a "REARGUE" as the Court was
deadlocked when O'Connor retired (she was going to vote the other way on
both cases) but her vote didn't count as she was retiring. On retrial,
Alito put the both over the top. So they can break into your house without
knocking.. then kill you...
maybe "law" in law school should be in quotes ;)
>From: scottelliott at grandecom.net
>To: edebate at ndtceda.com
>Subject: [eDebate] Death penalty upheld by S. Ct.
>Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 10:23:36 -0500
>For those voting on topics.
>Alito Breaks Tie, Kan. Death Penalty Stays
>Monday, June 26, 2006 10:34 AM EDT
>The Associated Press
>By GINA HOLLAND
>WASHINGTON (AP) ? New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito broke a tie Monday
>rule that Kansas' death penalty law is constitutional.
>By a 5-to-4 vote, the justices said the Kansas Supreme Court incorrectly
>interpreted the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual
>punishment to strike down the state's death penalty statute.
>The Kansas court said the state's death penalty law improperly forced
>impose a capital sentence even if they believed that the prosecution and
>defense evidence were equal in weight.
>But the justices disagreed. Writing for the majority, Justice Clarence
>disputed the claim by critics that the law created "a general presumption
>favor of the death penalty in the state of Kansas."
>The ruling affirms the court's long-held position that states should
>how juries weigh factors presented by the prosecution and defense in
>Fifteen states filed friend-of-the-court briefs, predicting that a ruling
>convicted murderer Michael Lee Marsh's favor would have required states
>capital punishment to set up systems for juries to weigh evidence at
>eDebate mailing list
>eDebate at ndtceda.com
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
More information about the Mailman