[antimedia] antimedia: Sometimes the "logic" of elites....

[Email subscription to blog articles]

Hey, since when do rulings from ANY court have to make sense?  The judges on 
our courts seem to really believe that any convoluted, twisted reasoning 
that fits their liberal ideals is just fine even if it makes no sense, is 
unconstitutional or even immoral.  Thank God our Supreme Court has taken 
turn toward the right.  Maybe now we can challenge some of those bizarre 
left-wing liberal rulings that have been handed down from our lower courts.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Email subscription to blog articles" <antimedia at lists.powerblogs.com>
To: <antimedia at lists.powerblogs.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:57 PM
Subject: [antimedia] antimedia: Sometimes the "logic" of elites....


Posted by antimedia:
Sometimes the "logic" of elites....
http://www.antimedia.us/posts/1183247860.shtml


   ....leaves you scratching your head. On the same day, the Supreme
   Court released two decisions. [1]The first is a masterpiece of
   reasoning and respect for legal precedent, striking down racial
   balancing rules as unconstitutional. In a rare occurrence, both Chief
   Justice Roberts and Justice Thomas wrote responses to the dissent,
   accusing them of legislating from the court as well as selective
   reasoning (of which they were most certainly guilty.) (Hat tip to
   [2]The Discerning Texan.)
   [3]The second is a masterpiece in obfuscation and muddled reasoning,
   setting up the court as the only authority capable of deciding whether
   an individual found sane and capable of understanding the charges
   against him, having been tried, found guilty and sentenced, can have
   his sentence carried out. In fact the second decision is the stark
   opposite of the first, ignoring the law and precedent and creating new
   law without any guidance for the lower courts to follow.

     The Fifth Circuits incompetency standard is too restrictive to
     afford a prisoner Eighth Amendment protections. Petitioners
     experts in the District Court concluded that, although he claims to
     understand that the State says it wants to execute him for murder,
     his mental problems have resulted in the delusion that the stated
     reason is a sham, and that the State actually wants to execute him
     to stop him from preaching. The Fifth Circuit held, based on its
     earlier decisions, that such delusions are simply not relevant to
     whether a prisoner can be executed so long as he is aware that the
     State has identified the link between his crime and the punishment
     to be inflicted.This test ignores the possibility that even if such
     awareness exists,gross delusions stemming from a severe mental
     disorder may put that awareness in a context so far removed from
     reality that the punishment can serve no proper purpose.

   So, even if the accused is found competent to stand trial, and even if
   the accused raises no competency claims at trial, and even if the
   accused acts as his own attorney, and even if the accused fully
   understands why the state wants to put him to death, if he claims it's
   for some other reason, then by God, we cannot put him to death,
   because, well, what purpose would it serve?
   Perhaps the Justices should look to their titles for the answer.
   Tags: [4]Supreme Court [5]death penalty [6]racial politics

References

   1. 
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/06/sparks_fly_at_the_supreme_cour.html
   2. 
http://discerningtexan.blogspot.com/2007/06/another-big-win-at-supreme-court-and.html
   3. http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2007/06/kennedy-for-sco.html
   4. http://technorati.com/tag/Supreme%20Court
   5. http://technorati.com/tag/death%20penalty
   6. http://technorati.com/tag/racial%20politics