![]() Even in decisions that uphold basic public health tenets, conservative justices have spouted misleading scientific claims. This is in contrast to the way our current conservative justices have viewed COVID restrictions, whether exempting religious groups from bans on group gatherings or barring vaccine mandates for large businesses. They have devalued the role of expertise.ĭisregarding science and evidence is a terrible shift for the highest court in the land, which once safeguarded the health of the public in rulings that upheld state vaccine mandates and safe food production. Over and over in the 2021–2022 term, their decisions put industry, religion (specifically, a conservative strain of Christianity) and special interests above facts. The promise of democracy is being sorely tested by judgments from the Supreme Court’s conservative justices in cases involving health, welfare and the future of the planet. ![]() It is alarming that the justices are now set to consider a voting rights case in the current term, given Chief Justice John Roberts’s feelings on what he calls the “sociological gobbledygook” of research into the effects of gerrymandering. Cases that the Court has decided to hear but have not yet been argued are previewed on the website.During a tumultuous few weeks in the summer of 2022, the Supreme Court ignored the scientific evidence underlying safe abortion, the need to slow climate change, and the value of gun safety laws. The opinions of individual Justices on the practice of the death penalty in the U.S. What DPIC OffersĭPIC has summaries of the important death penalty cases decided by the Supreme Court in the modern era. The make-up of the Court is likely to determine when such a case might be considered and how the Court will rule. Some Justices have called for a comprehensive review of the practice. ![]() Recent revelations about the risks of executing innocent defendants, racial bias in its application, and the lengthy time inmates spend on death row, has led society to rethink its support of the death penalty. The key question for the Supreme Court is whether the death penalty itself continues to be constitutional in light of its rare use and its rejection by large segments of society. constitution, others are result of federal decisions on both state and federal death penalty matters. ![]() Some of these cases arise from appeals of state rulings involving the U.S. In recent decades, the Court has regularly considered multiple capital cases each term. In the earlier history of the country, the Supreme Court left much of the practice of the death penalty and other punishments to the states’ discretion, rarely ruling on whether any practice should be considered cruel and unusual. Court rulings can involve the methods of execution used, the competency of defense counsel, the selection of juries, the behavior of the prosecution, and many other matters protected by the right to due process. In particular, the Supreme Court is responsible for ensuring that state use of the death penalty adheres to our fundamental rights. States may be more protective of individual rights than required under the federal constitution, but they cannot be less protective. The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of whether the constitution is being followed. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |