Posted on 02/03/2006 1:05:52 PM PST by FerdieMurphy
Just damn!
This has widely been debunked as misreporting.
Laura Ingraham had a good bit on it
Alito during confirmation process said in a death penalty case if 4 others desented he'd desent too as a matter of judical courtasy.
I RESPECT a MAN of his word.
Yes. This is also exactly what he said he would do during his Senate confirmation testimony.
Ah Ah ah don't try to spread reason now -- we are doomed, DOOmed, DOOMED!!!!!!!!
No one should start freaking out. If you were an incoming Justice and faced with a Death Penalty case on your first day wouldn't you tend to be cautious intill you are better settled and have chance to review everthing in the case.
Ping
While he may be a man of his word, it's hardly a proper way to interpret a matter of constitutional law. Head count and I'll vote.
Bump. The problems I have with Alito are the same problems I have with Roberts. Both big government conservatives. Thomas is the only originalist on the Court currently
Climb down off the ledge, Lee. Alito said in his hearings that he favored review of death penalty cases, and even said that he would provide the fifth vote as a matter of judicial courtesy if that situation were to arise. He's doing what he said he'd do.
Debunked already.
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito.....I just love to say it.
Taylor's lawyer, John William Simon of St. Louis, has since filed a federal court action arguing that the three drugs the state uses in executions create a risk of gratuitous pain that is not necessary to carry out "the mere extinguishment of life."
Fine hammer him with a couple of grams of heroin and let him enjoy the ride...
Agreed. This sounds like people trying to blow their own horn. The facts are this there often aspects of law that make it up to the Courts. Often Circuits split etc. Alito perhaps saw an issue that has been brewing in the lower courts and thought it should be addresses thats all.For goodness sake listening to a Death Penalty issue does not mean that Federalism is dead
Since the Constitution expressly forbids "cruel and unusual punishment," this is a good case for the SCOTUS to consider. It's a pure Constitutional issue.
Since the Constitution does not specify what is and is not "cruel and unusual," the SCOTUS is the body to decide this.
Alito is acting according to his beliefs that the court should not engage in activism. Constitutional issues are the very thing the SCOTUS is for.
Perhaps we gloated prematurely. Feels like we got semi-boiled egg on our faces after all the crowing we did on Tuesday! I hope I'm completely WRONG...:(
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.