"We decide. On your knees before Zod."
Posted on 06/25/2008 3:12:04 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
So we've turned over the deciding of political issues to the Supreme Court. We've even taken issues that are not political, like abortion, and made them political issues by granting the Supreme Court -- the Supreme Court actually taking the authority on its own to hear such cases. The rape decision here is sort of like this. Kennedy, Justice Kennedy, and the other four liberals are saying, (paraphrasing) "Look, the idiots in Louisiana don't know what they're doing. There is no consensus that child rape should result in death for the rapist, and besides, execution for child rape seems disproportionate to us, so we find that it's cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment." Now, executing the child rapist, after all, full access to the justice system is not on its face cruel and unusual punishment. Who benefits from this ruling? Who benefits from the ruling that child rapists cannot be executed, overturning a state law, Louisiana law? I'll tell you who benefits. It's the same people who celebrate due process rights for terrorists. So Anthony Kennedy right now is a hero of terrorists and their lawyers and child rapists. ...
We have Supreme Court justices who think we need to look to foreign law in order to adjudicate US cases. Now, largely what's happening is when they can't find a reason for their own personal policy preferences in the law in cases here, they'll go across the pond and they'll consult the elitist Europeans and their legal charters and opinions. They will do everything they can to find somewhere more "enlightened" than the US and our Constitution to find grounds for ruling the way they want to.
(Excerpt) Read more at rushlimbaugh.com ...
Sometimes even Rush misses the obvious ~ here the USSC is telling the rest of us that they know what they like and want there to be more of it.
Kennedy’s wrong often enough — but he’s hardly the most objectionable member of the Court. He’s not even in the worst 3.
I’d sooner give up Ginsburg, Stevens, Breyer or Souter than Kennedy.
H
If- big if— you have a strong stomach, MM has the details here:
He should be shot.
How do the American people express what we think of these legal dictators including the outrage, loathing, disgust, and the words that can’t be printed here?
"We the People are the rightful master of both congress and the courts -
not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution."
[--Abraham Lincoln, Political debates between Lincoln and Douglas, 1858]
I oppose the death penalty, but this decision is wrong. It’s obvious Justice Kennedy thinks he’s in charge of the country and not the elected representatives of the people.
“He should be shot”
The rapist, that is. But we need more accountability for all judges, even the highest ones. Fools...
To claim that the death penalty for child rape is disproportionate to the crime is to misunderstand the reason we formed a government. Governments are formed as a cooperative means of self-defense since few of us as individuals can protect ourselves from groups of domestic thugs let alone protect what is ours from foreign aggressors. Locking criminals up is one way to protect society, but deterring potential criminals is also a legitimate function of government.
The court still considers the death penalty appropriate for some crime; therefore it does not follow that it can violate the VIII amendment prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishments.” The death penalty is either cruel or unusual under all circumstances or it is not. Whether the death penalty for child rape is disproportionate is for our legislative leaders to determine after we the people elect them to office.
The reason we have a Constitution is to frame the debate in such a way that important principles are not forgotten in the passion of the moment, and that changes are reviewed by the different branches to assure that they are well considered. What Kennedy wants is to make the Courts the engine of change and to then impose that changes quickly and without consultation.
To use an evolving standard is to jump out in front of the people and assert where they should be and that the new standard can never shift in another direction. The Court adhering to the Constitution should really be more of an anchor holding us firm to what has traditionally been important so that the people evolving in new and untested directions do not forget it. The Court should not be in the vanguard leading the charge where five Justices make decisions for everyone else.
"We decide. On your knees before Zod."
bump
I don't think so.
Lincoln should have been impeached.
5 unelected lawyers tell US citizens their votes and laws don’t count.
I’ve often thought that if I were incredibly wealthy, I would make sure to buy houses all around their grandchildrens houses and let sex offenders live there for free.
Lots of words that can’t be printed here. LOL
Rush blows it here. Abortion was most definitely a hot political issue before Roe.
Admittedly, the attempt by the SC to remove it from politics made it a much hotter political issue and has kept it going much longer, but it was heating up anyway.
Four of those awful votes are over the age of 70. This alone is reason enough to vote for John McCain, in spite of all his faults.
What FDR feared is now needed...rural revolution.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.