FEATURED POST

America Is Stuck With the Death Penalty for (At Least) a Generation

Image
With Justice Anthony Kennedy's retirement, the national fight to abolish capital punishment will have to go local.
When the Supreme Court revived capital punishment in 1976, just four years after de facto abolishing it, the justices effectively took ownership of the American death penalty and all its outcomes. They have spent the decades since then setting its legal and constitutional parameters, supervising its general implementation, sanctioning its use in specific cases, and brushing aside concerns about its many flaws.
That unusual role in the American legal system is about to change. With Justice Anthony Kennedy’s retirement from the court this summer, the Supreme Court will lose a heterodox jurist whose willingness to cross ideological divides made him the deciding factor in many legal battles. In cases involving the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, his judgment often meant the difference between life and death for hundreds of death-row pr…

Is Chief Justice Roberts the New Man at the 'Center' for US Supreme Court?

Chief Justice John Roberts
Chief Justice John Roberts is the Supreme Court's new man in the middle. It's just that the middle may have moved well to the right.

The retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy means Roberts probably will be the conservative justice closest to the court's four liberals, allowing him to control where it comes down in some of its most contentious cases.

Roberts will be the justice who determines "how far they go and how fast they go," said Washington lawyer John Elwood.

Kennedy played a similar role for many years — his votes on gay rights, abortion, the death penalty, the environment, voting rights and affirmative action basically determined the outcome of cases on which the court was divided between liberals and conservatives.

Roberts has typically been to Kennedy's right. He did not endorse a constitutional right to marry for same-sex couples. He dissented when the court struck down Texas abortion clinic restrictions in 2016. The chief justice also was in dissent from the court's first major climate change decision in 2007, when it held that the Environmental Protection Agency could regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases as air pollutants.

New cases on any of those issues could be before the court soon and, even if Roberts is not prepared to overrule major Supreme Court precedents, he could be in position to cut back on environmental protections as well as gay rights and abortion rights.

Smaller steps might be in keeping with Roberts' preference for avoiding major divides where possible, and attracting votes from both conservatives and liberals. The 63-year-old chief justice may be in no hurry to move quickly, as he could be on the bench another 15 to 20 years.

"Chief Justice Roberts, more than any other justice on the court, believes in narrow rulings that attract broad majorities, answering no more than necessary to resolve a given case," Jonathan Adler, a professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, wrote on the Volokh Conspiracy legal blog.

In one sense, the Supreme Court's immediate future could look a lot like the term that just ended. Roberts seemed firmly in control of a court that overwhelmingly went conservative in divided cases, including upholding President Donald Trump's travel ban, striking a blow at public-sector labor unions, limiting workers' rights to band together to complain about pay and affirming Ohio's aggressive efforts to purge its voting rolls.

Only on one occasion did Roberts join with the liberal justices in a 5-4 decision, a ruling that said police generally must have warrants to get telecommunications companies' records showing where people have used their cellphones.

Twice, though, Roberts was among a larger grouping of justices in cases that skirted the big issue at stake, but that could return to the court. In one case, the justices rejected a lower-court ruling that set limits on redistricting for partisan gain, but without deciding whether limits ever could be imposed. In another, the court ruled in favor of a baker who would not create a wedding cake for a same-sex couple, yet left on the table the question of whether religious objections could be used to avoid complying with anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT people.

For all his votes on the conservative side of issues, Roberts has had his critics on the right. They include Trump, who once labeled Roberts "an absolute disaster" for the chief justice's critical vote to uphold the Affordable Care Act in 2012. Trump has not publicly criticized Roberts since he's been president.

The case arose in the middle of the 2012 presidential campaign, in which Barack Obama was seeking re-election and the health care law also known as "Obamacare" was a major issue. Then, as now, the five conservatives were nominees of Republican presidents, while the four liberals were chosen by Democrats.

In the end, Roberts sided with the liberals, a decision some court observers have attributed in part to concern about public perceptions of the court and the chief justice's desire to be seen as above the political fray.

"He's conservative, but he is an institutionalist. He believes deeply in the Supreme Court," said George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley.

A test of Roberts' ability to set the court's agenda could come on the topic of guns, said UCLA law professor Adam Winkler.

Roberts voted in favor of gun rights in two cases that held that Americans have the right to have guns, at least for self-defense in their homes. But the court has since rejected repeated attempts to expand on the right of gun ownership, in part because Roberts and Kennedy would not join the other conservative justices to take on a new case.

It takes the votes of four justices for the court to agree to review a case. If Kennedy's replacement is a fourth vote for a new case about guns, then Roberts might soon have to weigh in on issues like the right carry a concealed firearm in public or bans on assault weapons, Winkler said.

Source: The Associated Press, June 30, 2018


⚑ | Report an error, an omission, a typo; suggest a story or a new angle to an existing story; submit a piece, a comment; recommend a resource; contact the webmaster, contact us: deathpenaltynews@gmail.com.


Opposed to Capital Punishment? Help us keep this blog up and running! DONATE!



"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted." -- Oscar Wilde

Most Viewed (Last 7 Days)

Texas: With a man's execution days away, his victims react with fury or forgiveness

Texas executes Christopher Young

Ohio executes Robert Van Hook

Saudi Arabia executes seven people in one day

Execution date pushed back for Texas 7 escapee after paperwork error on death warrant

Ohio Governor commutes one sentence, delays another

Iran: Man executed in Mashhad; billionaire to hang over embezzlement charges

Ex-Aum member Yoshihiro Inoue’s last words: ‘I didn’t expect things to turn out this way’

20 Minutes to Death: Record of the Last Execution in France

Oklahoma: Death row inmate’s legal team hopes DNA testing on key piece of evidence will exonerate him before execution