If you still needed confirmation of the old adage “The road to Hell is paved with good intentions,” you need look no further than the US Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision in Roper v. Simmons, proffered on March 1st. The decision proscribes capital punishment for any offender who committed the crime before his 18th birthday. Note that the issue here is NOT executing juveniles, rather it is executing adults, who committed a formerly capital offense while still younger than 18.
If you wish to marvel at both Justice Anthony Kennedy’s tortuous “reasoning,” in coming up with the decision, or Justice Antonin Scalia’s ringing dissent—one of his best—then have at it.
Briefly, Kennedy wanted to reach a PC conclusion, and perverted the 8th amendment, felt that what happens in less than 50 percent of the states with a death penalty constituted a “majority,” and cited various international precepts. Yes, that’s just what we need, Justice Kennedy: to emulate the Euros on crime and punishment. Why not go as far as Germany, in which the most heinous crimes imaginable are punished by sentences of fewer than 10 years, and most of the perps are released well before even that short period?
Kennedy and his usual suspect Leftie brethren (Souter, Ginsburg, Stevens, and Breyer) evidently believe that your quality of life as Americans, or American society at large, is somehow improved if we exhibit more kindness, gentleness and mercy to vicious offenders. It seems to me that most Americans would put how we care for horrific murderers a bit lower on the list of what needs to be improved in the US, than our esteemed cohort of demented justices.
Sadly, though, this decision is merely the latest step in a progression of meta-constitutional overreaching, that has already done untold harm to our country, and shows no sign of slowing down. Historians will quibble about exactly when the Court went to Hell, but let’s simplify things and look at three post World War II cases.
In Brown v. Board of Education (1954), the court mandated an end to school segregation. Surely, this was a good cause, and had a moderate amount of public support. However, there was simply no legal basis for the Court to reach the decision it did, although this did not seem to matter too much at the time. There was a higher purpose to be served, or so it was said. Yet, this was the earliest high profile example of legislation from the bench, with many more to follow.
In Roe v. Wade (1973), the Court created a right to abortion out of whole cloth, applicable to all states. While there was a small amount of support for this cause, abortions were previously available in several states, and it strains logic to define this as a “good cause,” if it always results in the death of the fetus. Thus, in this exceedingly poorly written decision, the Court took a bad cause with limited popular support and made it into law.
In Roper v. Simmons (2005), the Court now takes a bad cause with no popular support, drafts an absurd majority opinion, and makes it into law. As you can see, the Court can do no worse. After all, any idea, no matter how ridiculous, will have some supporters. For the Framers, this would not have been a problem, since the Court was not intended to create laws. That was up to the legislative branch, but that was then and this is now.
How ironic that lifetime tenure, originally meant to protect the justices from faddish swings in public opinion, now protects them to adjudicate BASED on faddish swings in the Leftist manifesto.
Taking a page from The Supremes’ number one hit of 1965, written by the amazing Motown team of Brian Holland, Lamont Dozier, and Edward Holland, Jr…