Have I said fed courts don't have the right or power to review constitutional questions? No, I have not. You are making that argument to me and that is not my point.
I say again...Barring judicial review, the feds have no right or authority to usurp their power over the respective states making any and all executions illegal in and of themselves, just because they want to.
The aforementioned is what the biased author of the article is wanting. It appears that is also the position of Grump.
I am not denying the XIV Amendment itself much less the proper use of such. I disagree with your interpretation and use of it. We have been over and over that issue. I am not going to change my mind on that anymore than you are.
Your opinion is dead wrong. Under Artice III, the SC has the ultimate authority of original jurisdiction and/or appellate on all matters consitutional. The issues that we are discussing is one of due process and cruel and unusual punishment, both of which belong to the Supreme Court.
The central question in both cases is the process.
When a State is given notice that a person tried, convicted, and sentenced to death may in fact be innocent, what steps (if any) is it required to take to ensure guilt before carrying out punishment?
You can argue death for the innocent is a cruel and unusual punishment, but that's the effect and not the cause. The cause is the process that allowed it to happen in the first place, and that's what those particular cases address.
You are of course right. But it is lost on Jake, King of the Unsubstantiated Statements. He is dead wrong here, suggesting that the USSC would have original jurisdiction here. That is absurd. Nor is it an issue of cruel and unusual punishment.