Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Civil Liberties
Related: About this forumSupreme Court Draws, Quarters The Eighth Amendment
COURTS
Supreme Court Draws, Quarters The Eighth Amendment
The most disturbing and grotesque of originalist fantasies is now law.
By ELIE MYSTAL
Apr 1, 2019 at 4:45 PM
If Ramsay Bolton were made real and installed on the U.S. Supreme Court, he would sound exactly like Neil Gorsuch in todays opinion in Bucklew v. Precythe. While the opinion is dressed in all the civilized finery one expects from a high court decree, those trappings do not hide the savagery and cruelty animating its existence. This decision is evil, and if that seems like too strong a word for you, then I encourage you to go get f*cked because your inability to speak out against horror is one of the reasons were being dragged back into the Dark Ages.
The facts of Bucklew are simple and unconverted. Russell Bucklew was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by the state of Missouri. Bucklew has a rare medical condition that would make lethal injection extremely painful for him before he died. He challenged his death sentence under Eighth Amendment prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment. Nobody disputes that the lethal injection would cause Bucklew quite a bit of pain, due to his condition.
Despite that, the lower courts ruled against him, and today, the Supreme Court did so as well. Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch held that The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual methods of capital punishment but does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death. ... If that were the end of it, the opinion would just be another blood stain in our sad jurisprudence of death. Unknown numbers of innocent people have been executed in this country since the death penalty was reinstated. Untold numbers of guilty people have known the spiteful vengeance some people mistake for justice. Through it all, the Eighth Amendment sits on the sidelines, a grand idea neutered by our societys rage and cowardice, waiting for better men and women to live up to its noble promise.
But Neil Gorsuch is not a better man. Instead of just killing the murderer and being done with it, Gorsuch could not resist seeing the Bucklew case as an opportunity to experiment with justifications of the states right to inflict suffering that have long been discarded by decent people. ... Gorsuch, as you know, is an originalist, and the Eighth Amendment has always been an opportunity for such people to prove that their intellectual commitments trump any human suffering their philosophy requires. Obviously, capital punishment existed at the time the Constitution was written, and continued to exist after it and the Bill of Rights were ratified. The Founders didnt explicitly ban capital punishment, and they could have, so it must be okay as a Constitutional matter, so the originalist chant goes.
....
Elie Mystal is the Executive Editor of Above the Law and a contributor at The Nation. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at elie@abovethelaw.com. He will resist.
Supreme Court Draws, Quarters The Eighth Amendment
The most disturbing and grotesque of originalist fantasies is now law.
By ELIE MYSTAL
Apr 1, 2019 at 4:45 PM
If Ramsay Bolton were made real and installed on the U.S. Supreme Court, he would sound exactly like Neil Gorsuch in todays opinion in Bucklew v. Precythe. While the opinion is dressed in all the civilized finery one expects from a high court decree, those trappings do not hide the savagery and cruelty animating its existence. This decision is evil, and if that seems like too strong a word for you, then I encourage you to go get f*cked because your inability to speak out against horror is one of the reasons were being dragged back into the Dark Ages.
The facts of Bucklew are simple and unconverted. Russell Bucklew was convicted of murder and sentenced to death by the state of Missouri. Bucklew has a rare medical condition that would make lethal injection extremely painful for him before he died. He challenged his death sentence under Eighth Amendment prohibitions against cruel and unusual punishment. Nobody disputes that the lethal injection would cause Bucklew quite a bit of pain, due to his condition.
Despite that, the lower courts ruled against him, and today, the Supreme Court did so as well. Writing for a 5-4 majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch held that The Eighth Amendment forbids cruel and unusual methods of capital punishment but does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death. ... If that were the end of it, the opinion would just be another blood stain in our sad jurisprudence of death. Unknown numbers of innocent people have been executed in this country since the death penalty was reinstated. Untold numbers of guilty people have known the spiteful vengeance some people mistake for justice. Through it all, the Eighth Amendment sits on the sidelines, a grand idea neutered by our societys rage and cowardice, waiting for better men and women to live up to its noble promise.
But Neil Gorsuch is not a better man. Instead of just killing the murderer and being done with it, Gorsuch could not resist seeing the Bucklew case as an opportunity to experiment with justifications of the states right to inflict suffering that have long been discarded by decent people. ... Gorsuch, as you know, is an originalist, and the Eighth Amendment has always been an opportunity for such people to prove that their intellectual commitments trump any human suffering their philosophy requires. Obviously, capital punishment existed at the time the Constitution was written, and continued to exist after it and the Bill of Rights were ratified. The Founders didnt explicitly ban capital punishment, and they could have, so it must be okay as a Constitutional matter, so the originalist chant goes.
....
Elie Mystal is the Executive Editor of Above the Law and a contributor at The Nation. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at elie@abovethelaw.com. He will resist.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 1713 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (6)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Supreme Court Draws, Quarters The Eighth Amendment (Original Post)
mahatmakanejeeves
Apr 2019
OP
I've been thinking that this morning. We are letting one piece of shit destroy our country.
notdarkyet
Apr 2019
#2
Eliot Rosewater
(32,537 posts)1. America, ahh, you were something when you existed.
notdarkyet
(2,226 posts)2. I've been thinking that this morning. We are letting one piece of shit destroy our country.
GemDigger
(4,328 posts)3. Not we. The republican party in its entirety.