What do you know!– It was a 5-4 decision. Kind of predictable don’t you think? Nonetheless, the Supreme Court (namely the 5 liberal judges) in all its infamous wisdom decided that Louisiana’s law allowing the death penalty to be imposed against such offenders violates the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Tell that to the child, which in this case, she required stitches and corrective surgery after this form of of ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment was administered by a sick man.

Patrick Kennedy, 43, was sentenced to death for the rape of his 8-year-old stepdaughter in Louisiana. He is one of two people in the United States, both in Louisiana, who have been condemned to death for a rape that was not also accompanied by a killing.

Are we ruled by 9 philosophers, or by legislation and representation. I’m beginning to wonder if the Constitution means anything once the doors are closed during these meetings. How do they rule with such absolute authority?– as if they were incapable of error and full of insight and infinite knowledge that we mere mortals can never even hope to understand.
Justice Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion

“The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child,” AND “there is a national consensus against capital punishment for the crime of child rape…”the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim’s life was not taken.”

Samuel Alito in his dissent wrote:

“The harm that is caused to the victims and to society at large by the worst child rapists is grave. It is the judgment of the Louisiana lawmakers and those in an increasing number of other states that these harms justify the death penalty.”

Southern Appeal’s owner/operator said this about the decision.

As someone who opposes the death penalty in all instances, and who also believes that death is too good for any rapist (put his sorry a*s on a Cool-Hand-Luke-style chain gang for life, I say), I obviously favor the outcome in this case. That having been said, Justice Kennedy’s “reasoning,” as usual, is beyond pathetic. The Court’s opinion today in Kennedy v. Louisiana, as in Roper v. Simmons, is a constitutional abomination. There is simply no basis in the Constitution’s text, history, or structure for the Court’s decision (which rests instead on the Court’s own “independent judgment” and “evolving standards of decency”).. It is nothing less than rule by judicial fiat.

At some point, the American people are going to have to decide whether they wish to be ruled by nine (and in many cases five) unelected philosopher kings, or whether they would rather have the most contentious issues of public policy we face as a people hashed out in the legislative arena (as was envisioned by our founders/framers).

I, for one, favor the latter.

Oh, and given the nature of today’s decision, I thought I would excerpt a bit of my standard originalist stump speech that I give to Federalist Society chapters across this fine land of ours below the fold. Enjoy!

(more…)