High court strikes down death penalty for juveniles

[Imran Siddiqui]

The key word in that sentence is Constitution, not the national mood.

The national mood can be a part of it, especially with terms like 'cruel and unusual punishment'. What is cruel, what is unusual? That depends on the national mood.

What exactly is riduculous about saying that the people's representatives would be better at determining the national consensus

Because they don't have the right to decide. They don't interpret the Constitution, the Court does, so the Court is the one that gets to decide what the national consensus is.

I really wasn't aware that SCOTUS was entrusted was to make political judgements with barely a fig leaf of legal justification.

You've never read the Critical Legal Scholars then, I see... or studied the history fo the common law .

[Ramo]

The key word in that sentence is Constitution, not the national mood.

What constitutes "cruel" or "unusual" is not perpetually defined by some guys two centuries ago.

[Imran Siddiqui]

one can call the majority decision legislating against the popular will of the people

If the court has it wrong, there is always the amendment procedure.

[Ramo]

While a majority favors capital punishment as a general policy, there is far less support for executing persons who committed murder when they were under the age of 18. Just 35% support such a policy, while 58% are opposed.(1) Only 11% strongly favor execution in this circumstance, compared with 20% who strongly oppose it. There is little religious division on this issue. Similar percentages of white mainline Protestants (43%), white evangelicals (42%), and seculars (41%) favor capital punishment for minors, compared with 31% of white Catholics. As with the death penalty in general, African-Americans are the most opposed to capital punishment for minors. Fully 80% oppose this, while just 16% favor it.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=725

There's your national mood.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ramo

While a majority favors capital punishment as a general policy, there is far less support for executing persons who committed murder when they were under the age of 18. Just 35% support such a policy, while 58% are opposed.(1) Only 11% strongly favor execution in this circumstance, compared with 20% who strongly oppose it. There is little religious division on this issue. Similar percentages of white mainline Protestants (43%), white evangelicals (42%), and seculars (41%) favor capital punishment for minors, compared with 31% of white Catholics. As with the death penalty in general, African-Americans are the most opposed to capital punishment for minors. Fully 80% oppose this, while just 16% favor it.

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?PageID=725

There's your national mood.

Since I can't get your link to work, does the study give stats on the mood of states actually having capital punishment on the books as opposed to the nation as a composite?

Likewise has this changed in any respect since 15 years past?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
What is cruel, what is unusual? That depends on the national mood.

Actually it depends on the nature of the punishment in question not person being punished. If you want to say that a person lacks the requisite mens rea to be deserving of such punishments, that is an issue of fact to be either brought up at trial or before the people themselves to change the law.

Because they don't have the right to decide.

Neither does the Court. To borrow a phrase from the lunk heads, determining the national consensus is a "political question" outside of their purview.

They don't interpret the Constitution, the Court does,

If only they'd get back to that.

[Ramo]

Since I can't get your link to work, does the study give stats on the mood of states actually having capital punishment on the books as opposed to the nation as a composite?

I'm not sure what that sentence means...

The link seems to work for me. Incidentally, it's a Pew study taken in July 24, 2003.

Likewise has this changed in any respect since 15 years past?

Probably. According to Pew in this same study, support for DP in general dropped sharply from '96-'03 (strongly favor declines by 15, favored up by one, opposed up by 9, strongly opposed up by 3).

[Imran Siddiqui]

Actually it depends on the nature of the punishment in question not person being punished. If you want to say that a person lacks the requisite mens rea to be deserving of such punishments, that is an issue of fact to be either brought up at trial or before the people themselves to change the law.

Or before the court which is responsible for deciding if something is cruel and unusual to strike down a law. They are fully within their authority to say a person lacks the guilty mind in all similar instances to be charged with such a crime.

To borrow a phrase from the lunk heads, determining the national consensus is a "political question" outside of their purview.

No, it isn't. Cruel and unusual punishments can only be decided by either national consensus or a sense of absolute morality. I doubt the framers wrote the 8th Amendment to be without use as soon as they put pen to paper.

If only they'd get back to that.

That's what they are doing here, sweetie.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Btw, Ramo's link worked for me as well.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I still can't get the furshlugginer link to work. Will try later.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
The whole legislating from the bench is getting more than tiresome especially since they can't seem to make up their mind. 15 years ago it was one way now its another.

I find the majority opinion being based upon a building national consensus fraudulent and further an appeal to use of international precedent as laughable. Be that as it may the inconsistency of legally defined adulthood as 18 flies in the face of potential consequences for 16-17 yr olds could face.

I'm against the death penalty generally for the same reasons that Odin is, and against executing people for crimes committed while minors as well, but this ruling was crap. If there's a consensus then let the political organs of government deal with it. It's not an issue that is so important that it can't wait for a proper solution. The precedent set by the court here of doing whatever the hell they want while standing the constitution on its head is worse than the very few executions of minors which occur.

[Mr. Harley]

The decision was poorly written, no argument there. But some posters, when stating that it should be left to the courts to determine the mental competency of these minors when charged with a capital crime:

Actually it depends on the nature of the punishment in question not person being punished. If you want to say that a person lacks the requisite mens rea to be deserving of such punishments, that is an issue of fact to be either brought up at trial or before the people themselves to change the law.

New research has shown that is indeed the case (less mentally competent juveniles), but due to the adversarial nature of our courts, the return to go-for-the-jugler politics, etc. there is no reliable process in our courts or political system to address the science. If your parents are well to do, the chances of you successfully pleading this are greatly amplified than if your parents are poor, in Texas, and you have a pro bono defender.

So SCOTUS has intervened. The points concerning the mens rea were part of the briefs filed in this case. I agree that the decision was poorly crafted, but given how the US system of jurisprudence works, it was a necessary result.

In an ideal world what I want to know is what is the recidivism rate of these juveniles. Are they essentially at a butthole/jerk/dangerous phase, that with proper supervision they will outgrow and become productive members of society? Or are they little monsters in transition to becoming bigger monsters? My suspicion is the latter, given the Sociopathic personality, but the problem is that it is only a suspicion. It also is a study with no constituency, i.e. the law and order types simply want them executed, and the liberal types cannot believe that they may indeed by rabid little sociopaths. That's what I would like to know. Then we can make a sensible set of decisions on what to do with them.

[Odin]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

The whole legislating from the bench is getting more than tiresome especially since they can't seem to make up their mind. 15 years ago it was one way now its another.

Yes, standards change. As for this 'legislating from the bench', I wonder if people forget that we are a COMMON LAW country, hence, legislating from the bench is an inherant part of our system.

Also, I am annoyed when the consrvatives whine and b*tch about "activist judges", THAT IS THIER JOB, IT'S CALLED JUDICIAL REVIEW! The conservatives just want a court that is thier whore.

[DinoDoc]

Has the opinion been posted online yet?

[OzzyKP]

Just for you DD, I've saved the opinion myself: http://www.youthrights.net/court/ropervsimmons.pdf