Kagan's first vote on SCOTUS

[George Costanza]

Yet we used napalm in war causing undue pain and suffering.
CS gas against our own populace during the 60's and 70's and we tazer people today. All of this causes pain. I believe that executions should be by explosive device.

If there is any pain it cannot last but miliseconds and there is no body to bury!







'tis halloween afterall

You are joking, right?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

"There is no evidence in the record to suggest that the drug obtained from a foreign source is unsafe," the justices said, and "speculation cannot substitute for evidence that the use of the drug is 'sure or very likely to cause serious illness and needless suffering'."

Thats pretty much all that needs to be said.

No legal grounds to stay the execution.

Needless suffering...there is that troubling history we have of not meting out cruel and unusual punishment.

We have a history of that? When did it start?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This was a 5-4 decision - it was not just Justice Kagan who felt the execution should be stayed.



The fact that a condemned person "appears to die quietly" during a lethal injection excution, does not necessarily mean that he actually does "die quietly." The argument is, that the drugs that are supposed to pre-sedate, do not do a sufficient job. They only put the person under so that they appear to be out, but they are not. Then, when the killer drug hits their heart, they feel horrible pain. The pre-sedation drugs prevent the person from giving outward sign of pain - but he very much feels it. That's the argument.

I can personally attest to something similar. On more than one occasion, I have been given a drug that is supposed to knock you out. It didn't. I awakened in the middle of the procedure and experienced extreme pain. I was unable to indicate such to the doctor, however, due to the effects of the drug that had been given to me. In other words, it did not knock me completely out, but it did prevent my telling the doctor I was feeling pain.

You're arguing the pros and cons of the death penalty.

I'm saying in this instance there was no legal grounds to stay the execution based upon the evidence given by the defense attorneys.

I'm actually against the death penalty, but in this case the reasons given by the defense attorneys was a non-starter. SCOTUS did the right thing.

There must have been SOME legal grounds to consider the issue and continue the stay or else why would four of the five Jusitices have voted to do so?

Because they were considering political issues?

Be honest George, you know that SCOTUS is as political as anyone else, especially about hot button issues like the death penalty. Everyone expected a 5-4 decision here precisely because it was political. If it had been strictly legal it would have been closer to unanimous.

What we should be doing is working to amend the Constitution to eliminate one word from the 5th Amendment, thus eliminating all Constitutional arguments in support of the death penalty. Then people wouldn't have to try to get the courts to amend the Constitution by using the 8th to undermine the 5th.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is that true, they MUST follow a previous ruling? I'm not sure exactly how it works.

But it does seem we at least agree on the death penalty.

Why is one Congressman trying to impeach Roberts for not following precedent if they are not required to follow precedent?

 

[zzzz]

Yet we used napalm in war causing undue pain and suffering.
CS gas against our own populace during the 60's and 70's and we tazer people today. All of this causes pain. I believe that executions should be by explosive device.

If there is any pain it cannot last but miliseconds and there is no body to bury!







'tis halloween afterall

You are joking, right?

Sarcasm is a lost art. People take things too literally in this day and age.