Do today's Supreme Court justices know the Constitution better than the men who wrote it?

In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down state death-penalty laws for juveniles. The court threw out the capital sentences of seventy murderers, including plaintiff Christopher Simmons, who at seventeen abducted a woman, tied her up, and hurled her from a bridge. For this crime, a Missouri jury unanimously sentenced Simmons to death. Unwise? Perhaps. Unconstitutional? No.

The year the Constitution was drafted, Virginia exectuted a twelve-year-old boy. Seven years after Virginia ratified the Constitution, the Commonwealth hung a thirteen-year-old arsonist. Other states--governed by delegates to the Constitutional Convention--similarly executed teenagers both before and after the ratification of the Constitution. Why didn't any of the authors of the Constitution object to this violation of it when they lived?

If state legislators wish to rewrite capital punishment laws to exclude teenagers, they have every right to do so because they are the elected representitives of the people. In repealing the laws of nineteen states, the Supreme Court usurped a power granted not only to no court, but a power not even granted to Congress.

http://www.bushflash.com/14.html

Quick little diddy!

The supreme court can't "repeal" a law! When I read this story yesterday the AP actually used the wording: "the supreme court has permitted states" to use capital punishment since 1976.

My first thought was, "The states have permitted the supreme court to permit them to do things...since..." ugh. I then sank into a deep depression.

Quite frankly, Dan, you are arguing for that oh so unfashionable thing called "original understanding", which denies that the Constitution is a "living, breathing" document living in The Village. Connie has actually become enlightened since then, probably owing to her liberal neighbors so generous in enlightening her.

I have a question - if the Constitutional case against executing juveniles is so strong, why did Justice Kennedy cite international law and unratified treaties in reaching his decision? I doubt that even the plaintiffs of the case would have dared to present such things as evidence. Was Kennedy deciding the merits of the case, or arguing for one side?

I hope you saved me an aspirin, brigid.

Death Penalty is murder..it shoud be done away with all together, i guess its just another way of the state saying, "murder is wrong...unless its us doing it"
Gandhi once said "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" i think that applies here.
love & rage
@

In Justice Kennedy's opinion, he stated that a "consensus of the people are against putting juveniles to death."

WHAT??????????

Since when did the opinions of the freaking people matter to liberal justices like Kennedy?
Does he care that a consensus of people are againts Abortion? How about the consensus of the people being agaist gay marriage?

The juvenile who brought this case to the SC is a seventeen year old who told his friends he was going to kill someone cause he wanted to, then went and killed an elderly lady, then came back and BRAGGED to his friends that he killed her, and that he knew he could get away with it.

I am outraged by the tyranny of this court. What about the Constitution Kennedy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hi A -

If you think that capital punishment is murder, unjustifiable by any circumstances, there are recourses available to you - vote for legislators that agree with you. Vote for a governor that regularly commutes death sentences to life without parole. Don't rely on specious reasoning and judicial meddling such as that on display in this opinion. In the end, it weakens any legitimate argument in your favor.

I think that the State has the right to execute under certain circumstances, but I'd cringe if the Supreme Court decided to strike down state laws forbidding capital punishment. It's really none of their business either way. And I'd be really bugged out if they decided to do it because the Etruscans allowed the death penalty.

"consensus of the people are against putting juveniles to death."
-Justice Kennedy
I dont ever remember going to the voting polls and voting on this issue. As a country we are supposed to vote on these issues as a moral MAJORITY, not a moral MINORITY.

"consensus of the people are against putting juveniles to death."
-Justice Kennedy
I dont ever remember going to the voting polls and voting on this issue. As a country we are supposed to vote on these issues as a moral MAJORITY, not a moral MINORITY.

Kennedy's remark was ridiculous.

However, in response to a couple of other things said in this thread, while the US is meant to be a democratic republic, it is not a dictatorship of the majority either. Rule of law should have the final say on things such as gay marriage, not the consensus of the majority.

Any bad animal, even a human one, should be extoiminated.

Well, you can complain about it or you can help impeach Justice Kennedy.