Posted on 02/02/2006 1:54:21 AM PST by Bullitt
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.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Which is exactly what the media wanted to happen. The AP cherry picked this decision and set the headline and the tone of the article in such a way as to attempt to ruin the good mood the right was in after this confirmation and the SOTU. And it looks like they accomplished what they set out to do.
but i expect freepers to not fall for that crap, so it annoys me when i see them do it!
All it tells us is he exercises judicial restraint and temperament.
Although I believe your second explanation is the most likely, I've had fun this morning speculating that Alito is merely trying to establish his credentials as unabashedly Pro-Life.
Suckerbait, as you and others have noted.
It gives the media something to cheer about with Alito. They better relish the moment. I suspect when the dirtbag is executed, the media will don their longknives.
when judging him, please inform yourself of what was argued and what was precisely held. to be making snap judgments on a justice's performance without that information is foolhardy.
I say good. Bring back Old Sparky.
Laura Ingraham is commenting on this right now on her morning radio show:
"The media got the facts wrong. A federal court of appeals issued a stay of execution. It's a high standard to undue what a lower court did. Alito did not vote to stay a lower court of execution. It didn't happen. This is not a substantive decision. It's not a watershed moment. Take a chill-pill people."
http://www.1230amwith.com/
I think you'll find my previous post reasoned and temperate, if you reread it. Legal niceties aren't actually that important here; the decision to let the convict state is case is certainly reasonable, or at least not unreasonable. If he supports a declaration that lethal injection is "cruel and unusual", then again technicalities won't matter much. The only mitigation of such an outrage would be if the majority opinion declares that it should be replaced with the "humane and usual" punishment of hanging.
supporting the stay in no way rules on whether the method of punishment was cruel and unusual, it is a procedural ruling, which means the legal niceties ARE important. when judging a decision, in order to intelligently decide what was decided, one does have to know what was argued and what was actually ruled on.
Yes, that's precisely what I said. Thanks for echoing it back to me.
you are the one that said you would be watching his vote very carefully, my only point is that those circling him waiting for his votes, should inform themselves of what is argued and decided before going off half-cocked screaming that he is another Souter, which i actually saw posted somewhere on one of the myriad threads on this. i am not saying you said that or even that you intimated that. but it is being said.
What I find extremely odd is that the Supreme Court has agreed to review the lethal injection challenges at all. I mean, if they do overturn lethal injection then what method of execution could possibly be permissible??
It was just a year or two ago that some fat Floridian (or maybe it was in Alabama) challenged lethal injection, saying that applying it through all his fat was cruel and unusual (I think the idea was that they might need to cut him, or something). Anyway, the Supreme Court denied review.
So, why would this even be reviewed now? To my knowledge, there is no split in the lower courts. No Circuit Court has prohibited lethal injection as being "cruel and unusual", right? Maybe the liberals have reason to think that Kennedy might swing to their side. That's possible, and who the heck really knows what Kennedy will do???
Next time. As in, if the con wins his case, and the Supreme Court is called upon to affirm or overturn a ruling that lethal injection is cruel and unusual. We're talking about the future here.
In other words, this vote was benign, in and of itself. If and when the SC decides the constitutionality of lethal injection, I'll be watching with interest to see where Alito comes down.
half-cocked screaming that he is another Souter, which i actually saw posted somewhere on one of the myriad threads on this. i am not saying you said that
OK. You'd save confusion if you replied to posts that said that, rather than replying to random posts that aren't saying that. Readers have a way of assuming that your reply is, well, a response to what was actually said.
One has to overcome a high standard in order to overturn a stay put in place by a lower court. I don't understand why Roberts, Scalia and Thomas voted to overturn, but at most Alito was simply allowing a stay, put in place by one of the more conservative circuits, to remain in place pending that Circuit's own review.
In addition, Alito's vote was not determinative. The stay would have stayed in place regardless, because the vote was 6-3.
Therefore, given his arriving at the court yesterday, it was more than judicious to simply maintain the status quo. Bottom line: Chill folks
I hope he doesn't disappoint us. This recent decision disturbs me, in light of th fact that he didn't vote with Scalia, Thomas and ROberts - but I'm not an attorney and we'll have to watch and see how things transpire.
Someimes things are not as simple as we would wish them.
Thanks for the information.
It sure is odd to see so many Freepers anxious to consider the "legal theory" that execution by legal injection is "cruel and unusual punishment". Thousands of people with real cases are denied a hearing in the Supreme Court so the Supreme Court can waste time on issues like this? I suppose the Bush loyalists would be happy if Alito voted to hear some case denying a claim against McDonalds for causing obesity too. It's a "legal theory". Cases like this evidence a total lack of discernment by judges.
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.