No need to be proud. He didn’t die for the cause.
If he’s eventually executed he would be. That’s why we should use bullets dipped in pig blood to execute convicted terrorists.
The same judge that covered up the Uranium One crimes ruled that Trump can’t deny immigration from terrorist hotbeds because Trump retweeted something about using bullets dipped in pig’s blood - which this judge claimed proved he has a religious bias against Muslims. Apparently providing a disincentive isn’t “Constitutional”.
Maybe that judge should get a dose of his own medicine, and it should be ruled that people who kill judges will be punished by being placed on the bench themselves with the ability to overturn all the dead judge’s rulings. Because it would be unconstitutional for the judicial system to have a bias against judge-killers, or to provide punishments/consequences that would destroy their reason for wanting to kill judges in the first place. If providing disincentives based on the motives of the criminals is unconstitutional, as this judge claims, then he should get a dose of his own medicine.