Tuesday, March 01, 2005

Executing juveniles is wrong

First it was the mentally retarded. Now it’s juveniles 18 and under. Those “liberals” on the Supreme Court are just taking all the fun out of state-sponsored executions.

I’ve argued before that the death penalty is a barbaric relic of our past. I don’t expect most people to agree with me in these cold, hard-hearted radical/conservative times, but you might think something as basic as not executing children would be something we could all agree on.
But apparently not:

“The four most liberal justices had already gone on record in 2002, calling it "shameful" to execute juvenile killers. Those four, joined by Anthony Kennedy, also agreed with Tuesday's decision: Justices John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer.
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, as expected, voted to uphold the executions. They were joined by Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.”

The fact that only a slim majority of the Supreme Court can agree that executing juveniles is wrong is what is shameful. I’m really disappointed in Sandra Day O’Connor. But it is par for the course for the three neanderthal conservatives - Scalia, Thomas and Rehnquist.

Notice how they refer to the four justices as “liberal” when at best they should be described as moderate or middle-of-the-road. They are only “liberal” in the sense that they are to the left of the extreme radical views promoted by the neanderthal trio.

“In his dissent, Scalia decried the decision, arguing that there has been no clear trend of declining juvenile executions to justify a growing consensus against the practice.
"The court says in so many words that what our people's laws say about the issue does not, in the last analysis, matter: 'In the end our own judgment will be brought to bear on the question of the acceptability of the death penalty,' he wrote in a 24-page dissent.
"The court thus proclaims itself sole arbiter of our nation's moral standards," Scalia wrote.

So we have to wait until we have achieved a “growing consensus against the practice” before we can stop executing children. I wonder how many other heinous practices from out past would still be in effect today if the courts were filled with people like Scalia?
It’s chilling to think of the “moral standards” that Scalia must favor.

No comments:

Post a Comment