Posted on 02/02/2006 10:14:02 AM PST by sefarkas
Alito sided with the majority in a 6-3 vote that rejected a last minute request to allow Missouri to carry out the execution of Michael Taylor, 39, by lethal injection at midnight, a court spokesman said on Thursday.
He has challenged his death sentence on the grounds that the three-drug cocktail of lethal chemicals used in executions carry the risk of undue suffering, violating the U.S. Constitution's protection against cruel and unusual punishment.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"undue suffering"
That same argument can be used by his victims to fry the SOB.
Now let's not freak out yet. There are some real issues with that "cocktail." It's not like he was a swing vote or anything, either.
"The way a justice votes on a stay request does not necessarily signal how the justice will rule on the merits of a death penalty case. The court earlier this week granted a similar stay of execution to another death row inmate from Florida."
Right now, it is too early to tell. This involves procedural aspects rather than merits of the case. Clarence Thomas has voted this way in the past only to later rule against the petitioner on the merits.
BS. It was a 9-0 decision. There have been a number of incorrect articles floating around.
Evidently you couldn't wait to show how ill-informed you are.
ignorant kneejerk reactions abound.
/Couldn't hardly wait to post without searching.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1569812/posts
9-0, but it was a moot procedural vote anyway.
"WASHINGTON -- New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito cast his first vote on Wednesday, as the court refused to give Missouri permission to immediately execute a man who killed a teenage honor student.
The court's 9-0 action was procedural, however, because a stay was already set to expire Wednesday afternoon. "
Alito also had been on the USSCJ for only 16 hours or so. Even if this article was true.... maybe he wanted more time to review the case before deciding?
He's doing exactly what he said he would do.
Rush already talked about this.
Howlin, that ones gonna leave a mark ...
Evidently you didn't watch the Alito hearings.
I remember it well. He was questioned by Schumer and Schumer didn't like his answer.
Some here are acting very paranoid over one ruling which, if Limbaugh is right, was exactly what he said he'd do.
The MSM is just letting their own wishing thinking about Alito being another Souter get in the way.
I thought the issue before the Court is whether the §1983 civil rights statute can be used to by-pass the regular civil habeas corpus statute in challenging whether lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment?
May be we are due for a new purge on FR to get rid of trolls and Bush haters whose only goal is to spread lies, distort the facts, and cause divisions.
I can't get over how many people have put up threads with the WRONG information in them, without even LOOKING to see what the facts are.
The only conclusion I can make is that they were just WAITING for something, anything to trash this good man with.
There's a reason they're called The Unappeasables around here.
Sure as the sun comes up...
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.