Leave it to the State Supreme Court to do something really idiotic. Today, it ruled that the death penalty is cruel and unusual punishment which is unconstitutional. That's silly since the US Supreme Court has ruled to the contrary and its ruling control. But there's more to the story than just having the court make a useless ruling.
Let's start at the beginning. A few years ago, the state legislature ended the use of the death penalty in Connecticut for crimes after the date of the statute. This limitation was used because there had been an extremely vicious home invasion/rape/homicide for which many people wanted the perpetrators to be executed. This removal of the death penalty does not include a finding that the punishment was unconstitutional or inappropriate. If anything, the new law was an effort to end the interminable wrangling about death sentences that cost millions and went on almost forever.
Once the new law was passed, however, the killers on death row sued to overturn their sentences on the grounds that they were being denied equal protection and being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. It's a silly argument. It would be like convicted drug dealers arguing that they had to be released if the drugs they were selling were later legalized. It just doesn't work as a legal theory. Nevertheless, the new suit went forward through the court system and made it to the Supreme Court. It was a ruling in that case that the Supreme Court issued today.
The ruling only affects eleven killers. It, no doubt, brought joy to many on the left who are so adamantly against capital punishment. Given the small number of affected inmates, I doubt if there will be any attempt to appeal this decision to the US Supreme Court.
Let's start at the beginning. A few years ago, the state legislature ended the use of the death penalty in Connecticut for crimes after the date of the statute. This limitation was used because there had been an extremely vicious home invasion/rape/homicide for which many people wanted the perpetrators to be executed. This removal of the death penalty does not include a finding that the punishment was unconstitutional or inappropriate. If anything, the new law was an effort to end the interminable wrangling about death sentences that cost millions and went on almost forever.
Once the new law was passed, however, the killers on death row sued to overturn their sentences on the grounds that they were being denied equal protection and being subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. It's a silly argument. It would be like convicted drug dealers arguing that they had to be released if the drugs they were selling were later legalized. It just doesn't work as a legal theory. Nevertheless, the new suit went forward through the court system and made it to the Supreme Court. It was a ruling in that case that the Supreme Court issued today.
The ruling only affects eleven killers. It, no doubt, brought joy to many on the left who are so adamantly against capital punishment. Given the small number of affected inmates, I doubt if there will be any attempt to appeal this decision to the US Supreme Court.
No comments:
Post a Comment