State Court Successfully Tramples Supreme Court Ruling
Okay just when it seems that our highest court in the land cannot get too much further a field of America’s system of jurisprudence, it does precisely that.
The current situation is a bit confusing. A Missouri juvenile was convicted of a brutal murder when he was 17 years of age and sentenced to death. The man’s lawyers won his appeal against the death sentence with the Missouri State Supreme Court unilaterally vacating the previous ruling of the highest court in the land which had already established that the execution of a juvenile does not violate the 8th amendment. So here is what is extremely troubling.
A state supreme court trampled a ruling already standing by the highest court in the land. The U.S. Supreme Ct. should have rebuked the state court asserting their own precedent. Instead, the highest court in the land allowed this minor court to vacate their ruling.
But on what basis? The 8th amendment hasn’t changed so what has? The answer? According to Stephen Breyer world sentiment. That’s right Justice Breyer said the U.S. is out of step with the rest of the world so on that basis the Supreme Court ruled against themselves—not according to sound jurisprudence but according to international opinion.
This is outrageous! No longer is American law the rule of our judicial system but international law.
Steve Chapman writing for the Chicago Tribune unwittingly clarifies the issue at hand. He wrote, “Justices had no choice but to weigh in on the juvenile death penalty, simply because there wasn't a national consensus. What changed, in the court's opinion, were the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society. Today, it sees a new national consensus against such executions."
Wait a minute, since when is our system of law based on a raising of hands at any given time allowing the changing fancy of the masses or unelected individuals to establish or disintegrate specific laws at whim. If a law is to be changed, we have a legislative process which has been followed for over 200 hundred years yet all of that is discarded by activist judges who, in the view of Justice Scalia, are choosing their own personal views on issues rather than following case law.
This is judicial tyranny plain and simple. The epitaph our nation was penned centuries ago in the book of Judges. “There was no king in Israel, and every man did what was right in his own eyes.” God save the United States.
The current situation is a bit confusing. A Missouri juvenile was convicted of a brutal murder when he was 17 years of age and sentenced to death. The man’s lawyers won his appeal against the death sentence with the Missouri State Supreme Court unilaterally vacating the previous ruling of the highest court in the land which had already established that the execution of a juvenile does not violate the 8th amendment. So here is what is extremely troubling.
A state supreme court trampled a ruling already standing by the highest court in the land. The U.S. Supreme Ct. should have rebuked the state court asserting their own precedent. Instead, the highest court in the land allowed this minor court to vacate their ruling.
But on what basis? The 8th amendment hasn’t changed so what has? The answer? According to Stephen Breyer world sentiment. That’s right Justice Breyer said the U.S. is out of step with the rest of the world so on that basis the Supreme Court ruled against themselves—not according to sound jurisprudence but according to international opinion.
This is outrageous! No longer is American law the rule of our judicial system but international law.
Steve Chapman writing for the Chicago Tribune unwittingly clarifies the issue at hand. He wrote, “Justices had no choice but to weigh in on the juvenile death penalty, simply because there wasn't a national consensus. What changed, in the court's opinion, were the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society. Today, it sees a new national consensus against such executions."
Wait a minute, since when is our system of law based on a raising of hands at any given time allowing the changing fancy of the masses or unelected individuals to establish or disintegrate specific laws at whim. If a law is to be changed, we have a legislative process which has been followed for over 200 hundred years yet all of that is discarded by activist judges who, in the view of Justice Scalia, are choosing their own personal views on issues rather than following case law.
This is judicial tyranny plain and simple. The epitaph our nation was penned centuries ago in the book of Judges. “There was no king in Israel, and every man did what was right in his own eyes.” God save the United States.
posted by PB at 11:07 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home