Skip to comments.Alito Votes to Stay Mo. Execution
Posted on 02/02/2006 5:56:25 AM PST by NCSteve
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito split with the court's conservatives in a death penalty case on his first day on the court.
Handling his first case, Alito sided with five other justices Wednesday evening in refusing to allow Missouri to execute inmate Michael Taylor.
Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas supported lifting an execution stay issued by an appeals court, but Alito sided with the majority in turning down Missouri's last-minute request to allow a midnight execution.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
All I can think is that he did not have appropriate time to research the case. That would make sense to me.
To fault him on this on day 1 is silly.
Yes indeed...bring back Harriet Miers!!!!!
he gets this cold on the day he takes the oath and you expect him to have a man put to death without reviewing.
give him a couple of weeks before condeming him.
The 12th time this article has been posted....
I have to agree. I would like to know more about his reasoning, however. From everything I could see about Alito, he's a stickler to the law and the facts, regardless of the issue.
"I don't know of a way to justify this vote on federalist or originalist grounds"
Constitutional scholar are we?
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.
The Supreme Court allowed the very same issue to go forward in Florida a week ago. Having two courts rule on this issue lets the Supreme Court decide the issue based on the best case available. This ruling is no big deal and certainly is no idication of Alito's posistion on the issue.
You are correct. In this light I think he demonstrated very sound judicial temperment.
Link? I searched half a dozen times before posting it. And don't link me to the AP article. That's not the same one.
Is that called "presedence" or in my not so lawyered tongue... "it happened before"?
I agree completely. I suspect you are right about him having no time to prepare. And where a human life is at stake, it is far better to err on the side of caution.
By GINA HOLLAND The Associated Press
He only voted to "stay" the execution...not to stop it from ever happening.
I think in the end, the scumbag will be executed, and some FReepers will have wasted gun powder over nothing.
The liberals are probably wishing that now. She probably could have swung sometime like Sandra Day O'Connor. No they have the "RIGHT" guy in there now.
Gina Holland is a moron same for those who take what she writes as legal fact.
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.