[eDebate] One more note....RE: Death penalty upheld by S. Ct.

Ken DeLaughder kenedebate
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 
penalty case....

"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...

Yay Alito!

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
>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 
>jurors to
>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 mailing list