Alito Splits With Conservatives on Inmate

Yahoo! ^ | 02.01.06 2 minutes ago | GINA HOLLAND, Associated Press Writer

[definitelynotaliberal]

WASHINGTON - New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito split with the court's conservatives Wednesday night, refusing to let Missouri execute a death-row inmate contesting lethal injection.

ADVERTISEMENT

Alito, handling his first case, sided with inmate Michael Taylor, who had won a stay from an appeals court earlier in the evening. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas supported lifting the stay, but Alito joined the remaining five members in turning down Missouri's last-minute request to allow a midnight execution.

Earlier in the day, Alito was sworn in for a second time in a White House ceremony, where he was lauded by President Bush as a man of "steady demeanor, careful judgment and complete integrity."

He was also was given his assignment for handling emergency appeals: Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota. As a result, Missouri filed with Alito its request for the high court to void a stay and allow Taylor's execution.

The court's split vote Wednesday night ended a frenzied day of filings. Missouri twice asked the justices to intervene and permit the execution, while Taylor's lawyers filed two more appeals seeking delays.

Reporters and witnesses had gathered at the state prison awaiting word from the high court on whether to go ahead with the execution.

An appeals court will now review Taylor's claim that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment, a claim also used by two Florida death-row inmates that won stays from the Supreme Court over the past week. The court has agreed to use one of the cases to clarify how inmates may bring last-minute challenges to the way they will be put to death.

Alito replaced Sandra Day O'Connor, who had often been the swing vote in capital punishment cases. He was expected to side with prosecutors more often than O'Connor, although as an appeals court judge, his record in death penalty cases was mixed.

Scalia and Thomas have consistently sided with states in death penalty cases and have been especially critical of long delays in carrying out executions.

Taylor was convicted of killing 15-year-old Ann Harrison, who was waiting for a school bus when he and an accomplice kidnapped her in 1989. Taylor pleaded guilty and said he was high on crack cocaine at the time.

Taylor's legal team had pursued two challenges — claiming that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment and that his constitutional rights were violated by a system tilted against black defendants.

The court, acting without Alito, rejected Taylor's appeal that argued that Missouri's death penalty system is racist. Taylor is black and his victim was white. He filed the appeal on Tuesday, the day that Alito was confirmed by the Senate.

[Torie]

Of what you as an analytic tool is the "Catholic" adherent paradigm on anything? The usefulness of the tool seems to have achieved the null set as far as this near atheistic Wasp can tell.

[AntiGuv]

My comment above probably came across a good bit harsher than I intended. I didn't need to repeat "dumb" so much - I was just annoyed you called me dumb.

To reiterate, my main point was that there's no reason to assume Alito's position on execution will be the same as that of the other conservatives on the Supreme Court, certainly not just because of their mutual Catholic faith. Alito's lower court record was mixed, and some of his decisions were overruled by the conservative wing of the Supreme Court.

And as for my referencing Alito's Catholicism, my only point was that people who hope that he rules consistent to that on abortion or church/state issues should not then complain if he rules consistent to that on execution. I'm not saying it will be because of his Catholicism.

But for those who did in fact hope that Alito's faith would influence his rulings, then they should bear in mind that it's a package deal. The Catholic Church is (rightly in my view) pro-life on both abortion and execution.

[AntiGuv]

The Constitution is silent on capital punishment. It does not clearly provide for one or the other. What the Constitution does say is: "Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

That's it. And there is absolutely no way to apply the Eighth Amendment except by subjective measures. The Constitution does not define "excessive bail" or "excessive fines" or "cruel and unusual punishments" at all. It is left entirely up to the subjective judgment of the individual. It is easily the most subjective clause of the entire Constitution.

And no one can deny that notions of what constitutes "cruel and unusual" punishment have changed over the centuries, and will continue to change.

[Torie]

As to what aspect of the human experience at this juncture do you view as an useful analytic tool, the "Catholic" adherent paradigm, if anything?

There, that is slighty less incoherent.

[jveritas]

I understand your point and you have a good argument there however I still believe that for this particular case he voted the way he did because he just did not have enough time to review it since he has been on the US Supreme Court for only few hours. Anyway I do apologize for calling your earlier argument "dumb". :)

[jveritas]

Some people on this thread were already implying that we had another Souter on our hands with Justice Alito and that is absolutely wrong. I hope that you agree with the vast majority of us that Alito is a conservative judge.

[HiTech RedNeck]

"Heads up" does not count. He can NOT take into consideration anything he "heard" before actually sitting as a judge on the Supreme Court.

[AntiGuv]

I agree that Alito is a conservative judge. I would be rather shocked if he ends up as another Souter instead. But, there are certainly conservatives who oppose execution and I don't know if Alito is one of them. His lower court record is clearly mixed. Now, even if he does personally oppose capital punishment I don't know if he would vote to, say, strike it down. He doesn't seem at all like an 'activist' type judge. But that doesn't mean he will not vote to review its application very strictly, as Kennedy often does.

[HiTech RedNeck]

The Constitution deliberately contains terminology which is intended to be a mirror on current mores.

[Hieronymus]

The Catholic view on the death penalty has been a bit over-simplified on this thread--more consistent with what tends to be presented by a substantial portion of the U.S. Bishops than what Rome actually puts forth.

The Universal Catechism, in its definitive revised edition, has this to say (parg. 2267)
"Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity with the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm--without definitively taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself--the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are 'very rare, if not practically non-existent'[citation of Papal document".

While the Church offers guidelines regarding the application of capital punishment, the punishment is not forbidden. Viewed from the grand scheme of human history, executions in the U.S. presently are "very rare, if practically non-existent." Compare our rate of execution to that of China, or Saudi Arabia--and remember this document is aimed world-wide.

[jordan8]

First of all, the victim of racism here is that poor little girl who met her own personal little Auschwitz in that basement. Part of the pandemic of black on white rape of the last few decades that could only happen because the liberal establishment wants it to happen. As to the case, there had better be more to it than this, that lethal injection is cruel and that the system IN GENERAL is racist. It shouldn't take more than ten seconds for anyone of average intelligence or sense to reject this nonsense.

Here are a couple of more stories on this case:

Case Facts: After using drugs, Roderick Nunley and Michael Taylor stole a car. While driving the car, the two men spotted a fifteen-year old girl waiting for her school bus. Taylor allegedly stated he wanted to steal the girl’s purse, and Nunley, who was driving, stopped the car. Taylor spoke to the girl and then grabbed her and forced her into the car. Nunley then drove to his mother’s house. The girl was taken out of the car and forced to crawl down to the basement. Taylor then raped the girl. At some point, Nunley gave Taylor some lubricant to facilitate the forced sexual intercourse. After the assault, the two men forced the girl into the trunk of the stolen car and tied her up. After Taylor stated he was afraid the girl would identify him, the two men decided to kill the girl. Nunley retrieved two knives from the kitchen and both men stabbed the girl. Nunley knew the girl was going to die from her wounds. (The former county medical examiner testified the victim was stabbed ten times and she died approximately thirty minutes later.) The men drove to a nearby neighborhood and parked the car, leaving the girl in the trunk. Nunley gave a videotaped confession to the police.

-----------

POTOSI, Mo. -- A high-ranking official at the Potosi Correctional Center was hospitalized after being stabbed by a convicted murderer, a spokeswoman for the Department of Corrections said Monday.

The victim's name and condition were not released, but spokeswoman Wanda Seeney said the victim is a unit manager, the No. 3 person at the prison about 70 miles southwest of St. Louis. He was hospitalized in St. Louis with several stab wounds. KMBC reported that the prison official was listed in stable condition Monday night.

The stabbing happened about 8:45 a.m. Monday. Seeney said the circumstances surrounding the incident were not immediately clear. Also uncertain was what weapon the inmate used to commit the crime.

The suspect is Roderick Nunley, who is on death row for a conviction out of Jackson County for first-degree murder, rape, kidnapping and armed criminal action. Nunley was convicted of killing 15-year-old Ann Harrison in 1989. Harrison was kidnapped from in front of her Kansas City home as she waited for the school bus, leaving her books and band instrument behind.

Since the stabbing, Nunley has been placed in a segregated confinement unit at the prison.

The inmate apparently acted alone, Seeney said. Still, prison officials suspended movement at the institution.

The Potosi Correctional Center is one of the state's maximum security prison and houses all of Missouri's Death Row inmates, in addition to others who have committed violent crimes.

[Revenge of Sith]

Catholicism does not forbid capital punishment (BTW the current pope never said anything against the death penalty) and Alito has enforced the death penalty.

[Torie]

My point is what "Catholics" believe as citizens. Catholics on most issues in the public square have beliefs per the pollls which are largely indistinguishable from Americans in general. The Catholic label in short has very little predictive value as to beliefs on public policy issues. Many Catholics are ready to defy the Catholic hierarchy at the drop of a hat, and which ones do, varies by issue. In my view, Catholics act from individual conscience, based on their own experience, which is so much larger than what they get from their faith, just like most Americans.

[AntiGuv]

I'm still not entirely certain I follow your question. If you mean in what regard do I think Catholicism should play a role in analyzing the judgment or character of political figures, then I think that's twofold.

The Catholic Church's tenets and values are hardly a mystery. If one is a practicing, faithful Catholic then it's safe to conclude that one's principles are mostly, if not entirely, consistent with those proclaimed by the Roman Catholic Church. Even if one is a nominal Catholic or a lapsed Catholic, then barring contrary information, it's safe to assume that one's upbringing was shaped by those same principles.

But as a matter of practical course, it doesn't seem to have much bearing at all anymore. The modern Catholic Church is (a) pro-life on both abortion and execution; (b) pro-life on war - i.e., anti-war; (c) traditionalist with regard to family and sexuality; (d) quasi-monarchist with regard to government - i.e., ambivalent with regard to populist movements; (e) socialist with regard to economic affairs.

So, how many people do you know adhere to that entire spectrum of issues? Not many I'd bet. In its totality, the Catholic Church cuts across contemporary liberal/conservative lines and the ideology of its congregation tends to be much more defined by political views than religious teachings.

So, in short, I would say that it's not especially useful except in the most broad sense of identifying the religious influences that shaped one's beleifs, although whether in a proactive way or a reactive way depends on the individual, on the given issue, and on his social context.

[Revenge of Sith]

I noticed that in a recent critique of the death penalty by the US bishops, four bishops voted against it! I'd love to know who they were. The younger priests being ordained today tend to be more conservative than the older priests.

[Torie]

My question/point, ineptly made as it was, is that if one self identifies as a Catholic, that reveals very little about what one believes about anything, when it comes to public policy issues that divide the American public square. Thus chatting about Catholics on the court, or Alito as a Catholic, is sort of a waste of time.

[Torie]

the Catholic Church cuts across contemporary liberal/conservative lines and the ideology of its congregation tends to be much more defined by political views than religious teachings.

And there you have it.

[kcmom]

does anyone here remember what kind of record Souter had on the bench nefore he got on the SCOTUS? Not relevant to this discussion as much as I'm just curious.
My opinion fwiw is that Alito wanted to get the case on the merits to decide once and for all whether lethal injection is cruel and unusual, to which he can vote w/ the conservatives and say no it's not (it differs from the abortion issure b/c the defendant had due process and was determiined guilty so we're not talking about innocent life. A moment to rant here, it AMAZES me that liberals can be against death penalty and for abortion....like there's nothing wrong with murdering a defenseless unborn child.) Thanks, I'm done now.
Give the guy a break....all this conjecture is giving the dems something to talk about.

[Steve_Stifler]

Justice Scalia would, respectfully, tell you you're full of it.

[AntiGuv]

You are absolutely correct! But let me try to make this crystal clear for everyone. My point was not to say that we can analyze Alito's views on the basis of his Catholic faith, or that his Catholic faith is revealing of how he will rule as a judge.

My point was simply that those people who expressed hope that he would rule consistent with Catholic doctrine on abortion or church/state issues, merely as a reflection of his Catholic faith, should not then whine if he also rules consistent with Catholic doctrine on execution.

If you want a Catholic who judges on the basis of his Catholicism and not on the basis of the Constitution, as it should be, then it's a package deal!