Good find. I'm not a lawyer, and I'm a little speechless right now. Maybe it's time to consider retiring judges for senility. To think that the 'Supremes' are actually entertaining such barbarity:
"B. "Burning" Was Intended To Be a Quick and Relatively Painless Non-disfiguring Form of Execution.
The Mishna in Sanhedrin (52a) also described the procedure for "burning" and stated clearly that it did not involve actual resort to fire or flames. Rather, an extremely hot object (or wick) was inserted into the mouth of the condemned individual so as to cause instantaneous death. Here, too, the objective was to cause death quickly and without mutilation of the body.
Indeed, the Mishna concludes with a very revealing passage that condemns any court that would put an accused to death with actual flames (id.; emphasis added):
Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Tzadok said "An incident once occurred with the daughter of a priest who committed adultery and they surrounded her with bundles of branches and burned her." The other rabbis responded to him, "That was done because the court that performed this execution was not knowledgeable." ...."
http://www.jlaw.com/Briefs/capital2.html reminds me of 'necklacing'
I'm not a lawyer, and I'm a little speechless right now. Stunned me too. I'm all for religion in the public square but don't go filing briefs in the Supreme Court which ignore Anglo-Saxon jurisprudence and U.S. law. From what I read of the group behind this, they have larger plans in mind. Imagine the outrage we would hear of a evangelical Christian filed a comparable brief with the court.