May 28, 2007

"There were far too many variables to consider..."

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote:
"The death penalty is touchy enough without having to worry about how it relates to the mentally ill. This really seems like one of those things that should be decided on a case by case basis by the people involved, not by us."

The opinion further stated that the court was "intimidated" by the extreme pressure brought on by its eminent position, arguing that it would have been much easier for the justices to deliver a firm, definitive ruling had they not been "hyper-aware" that constitutional scholars, trial lawyers, and lower-court judges would study and discuss their decision for generations to come....

The oral arguments by opposing attorneys Keith S. Hampton and Gena B. Bunn, though impressive, reportedly only made matters worse.

"Both attorneys were super smart and well prepared and made a lot of really good points," Justice Samuel Alito said. "When Mr. Hampton was presenting his case, I was thinking, 'Yeah, this is totally right,' and I was prepared to side with him. But then Ms. Bunn got up and sounded just as convincing, but argued the exact opposite point. It's like, who do you believe?"...

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote the lone dissenting opinion, in which she stated that she knew the correct decision was either yes or no, but couldn't say which one it should be.

12 comments:

amba said...

I knew from the tears in my eyes that it had to be The Onion.

Mindsteps said...

A comment from the aforementioned Onion article attributed to Justice Thomas:

"If it were just us sitting around having a few beers and shooting the breeze, it would have been, like, yeah, sure, execute the mentally ill, they should have known what they had coming to them that far into the legal process," Justice Clarence Thomas said. "But we don't want to set some huge precedent or something. So how about this: How about if mentally ill people just stop killing people altogether? That would certainly make our jobs a whole lot easier."

Jacob said...

I was just skimming this and taking it perfectly seriously until I got to the Alito line.

Mindsteps said...

A rare, yet penetrating, glimpse into the mind of Justice Thomas. I can't wait for the ruling on the Lohan v Sunset Blvd Curb.

From Inwood said...

Mindsteps

You liked only the satirical thrust directed at Justice Thomas. So much that you made two postings.

I thought that it & the thrusts directed at six of the other justices were extremely clever & showed a keen knowledge of the minds of such justices.

Are we showing our prejudices?

Simon said...

From Inwood said...
"I thought that it & the thrusts directed at six of the other justices were extremely clever & showed a keen knowledge of the minds of such justices."

Ironically enough, the purported Thomas line was the furthest from the mark; they attribute to the Justice least likely to defer to precedent the line "we don't want to set some huge precedent or something."

Mindsteps said...

From Inwood said...
Mindsteps

You liked only the satirical thrust directed at Justice Thomas. So much that you made two postings.


Nothing to do with racism. Prof. Althouse presented two posts about Justice Thomas's supposed reticence. Reading a Thomas "quote" seemed particularly significant. Also, I inadvernantly left the second part of my first post off. I added it as a second post.

I thought the entire article was nicely satirical.

Mortimer Brezny said...

That's why the Thomas comment is funny. It's exactly what he wouldn't say. The Alito line, however, is something that Thomas did say.

B said...

Reminds me of an old New Yorker cartoon I saw as a kid.

2 robed justices walking together down a hall, one justice saying:

"Some days you're in a good mood and you let everyone off. The next day you're mad as hell and everyone gets the death penalty. It all evens out in the end."

This former 8 year old is still scared when he remembers it.

dlentz10 said...

It would be refreshing to see the justice quit pontificating on the constitutinality of what is not in the Constitution. Alas, that would be expecting too much

From Inwood said...

Simon:

Peace. Brezny has answered for me.

Mindsteps:

My "prejudice" remark had nothing to do with racial prejudice. Just wondering if you were, prejudically, zeroing in on Thomas alone, he being a bĂȘte noir (can I say that about him, tee hee) of the Left, which you say you weren't & peace to you too.

b:

Be afraid, be very afraid of Judicial Activism.

Be aware, be very aware of New Yorker Cartoons about lawyers.

Be glad, be very glad that The Onion & Scrappleface can puncture the self-inflated SCOTUS.

Be amused, be very amused at how dramatic I can be.

hdhouse said...

this was all a joke right? the thomas quote was a joke? someone just wrote that and attributed it thomas? does alito talk like a valley girl? is roberts serious or is he pulling our leg?

woe unto us.