The victim, 15-year-old Ann Harrison, was waiting for a school bus when Taylor and an accomplice kidnapped her in 1989. This slimebag sleazeball has been living on our dime since 1989? What ever happened to swift justice?
Posted on 02/02/2006 5:26:31 AM PST by Boston Republican
Alito splits with conservatives on first case Votes to stop Missouri from executing killer contesting lethal injection WASHINGTON - New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito split with the courtÂ’s conservative wing Wednesday night, refusing to let Missouri execute a death-row inmate contesting lethal injection. 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 MissouriÂ’s last-minute request to allow a midnight execution.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Yes, you may be jumping to conclusions. Or maybe racing to conclusions.
Chill.
Can you clear something up for me? I first heard this report that all Alito did was vote along with all nine justices, so it was no big deal. Like it was unanimous. Now I read, no, he voted differently than Thomas, Scalia and Roberts. Was that first report about some other case that really was 9-0, or was the report just flat out wrong???
wishful thinking by a pissed off MSM
Sorry. I did searches on Alito and SCOTUS and didn't find anything. My bad.
The search function is not the best. My only issue is that most of these threads you have people going off half-cocked about Alito being some liberal, and have no idea what the issue was before the court.
The first ruling was really 8-0 because Alito did no participate. This ruling was actually 6-3. None of the articles do a good job at explaining what was decided. Lots of bad info going around.
Wow, talk about butchering a story.
Alito Hearings
ALITO: Well, Senator, it is unconstitutional to execute someone who has not been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Now, depending...
LEAHY: They may have been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, is what I'm saying. And then as a lot of these people were on death row and had to be commuted at the last moment when they -- a few days before the execution they found, whoops, they have the wrong guy.
ALITO: That's the ultimate tragedy that could possibly occur in our criminal justice system. We should do everything we can to prevent that from ever occurring.
I have not had a case -- during my time on the court of appeals, I've had only a handful of capital punishment cases where there was a suggestion that that was a possibility.
If the evidence develops at the last minute, then I think -- and if this is -- it would depend to some degree on -- the procedures would be different, depending on whether the person had been convicted in state court or in federal court.
The first procedural step in either instance would be to file a petition with the trial court.
ALITO: If it were in state court, it would be a state collateral relief petition. And those are handled differently depending on the state. And then file a -- I'm sorry. You could go to the state court or you could attempt to file a second habeas petition in federal court and follow the procedures that are set out in the habeas corpus statute.
LEAHY: But you agree with -- I understand all the steps. Like you, I was a prosecutor. Even though we don't have death sentence in Vermont, we have real life imprisonment. And I remember those.
But you agree, though, with Chief Justice Roberts that the Constitution does not countenance the execution of an innocent person?
ALITO: The Constitution is designed to prevent that.
LEAHY: And the reason I ask this, this is something that originally raised, as I recall, in the Judiciary Committee by Chairman Specter, the Rule of Four. Are you familiar with that, where the Supreme Court?
In other words it takes five justices to stay an execution or to hear one of these cases. Usually, if there's been four that have agreed it should be, somebody will make the fifth just as a matter of courtesy.
It hasn't been followed that much recently. Chairman Specter has called it is bizarre, an unacceptable outcome, to not provide the fifth vote. He wanted to introduce legislation to codify the Rule of Four.
If you were one of the justices and you're there -- and these things always seem to happen. Everybody is scattered all over the place. Four of your fellow justices have said that they would hold, what would you do? They voted to stay an execution. They're asking you to be the fifth vote. Four have...
ALITO: I had not heard of this rule until the hearings for Chief Justice Roberts. But it seems to me to be a very sensible procedure because I think we all want to avoid the tragedy of having an innocent person executed or having anyone executed whose constitutional rights have been violated.
There's nothing in here to say Alito's against the death penalty.
The victim, 15-year-old Ann Harrison, was waiting for a school bus when Taylor and an accomplice kidnapped her in 1989. This slimebag sleazeball has been living on our dime since 1989? What ever happened to swift justice?
A stay of execution pending review is not exactly an earthshaking rejection of principles. Pretty safe vote with the majority when you haven't had a lot of time to study the issues.
This child was granted NO stay of execution by the monsters that murdered her. Alito's vote on this thing is inexcusable...what could possibly be going on in his mind? I'm afraid we have been hoodwinked again with another a$$hole on the supreme court.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito....I just like saying it!
Let's hope this is the last of the Samuel Day O'Lito swing votes. ;)
"I'm afraid we've been hoodwinked..."It sure looks that way doesn't it?
Thanks for the post.
All I see is a prudently cautious conservative. Think before you act, and all that.
I think we just cut him some slack, first case and all.
Your welcome. For more GOTO search Alito confermation hearings, Google.
"How come Roberts, Scalia and Thomas voted the other way on the stay of execution?
Do they not 'think for themselves?' Are they not 'states rights justices?' Do they not engage in careful deliberation?"
Of course not. They simply read the case differently than Alito did. Each justice has to use his own judgement when analyzing the details of individual cases. In this case, Alito simply read the case differently than Scalia, Roberts, and Thomas. Nothing wrong with coming to differing conclusions based on analysis.
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.