So the Supreme's today overturned the Supreme Court of Kansas's ruling that Kansas' death penalty statute violated the Eight Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Guess who was the deciding vote...pause for effect...Justice Samuel Alito. I was angry then and now I am f'in pissed. More below the fold.
So when we were fighting for the filibuster, this was our concern. We were concerned that the Supreme Court was going to be moved too far to the right, especially in light of the fact that Alito was taking the place of the moderate Justice O'Connor. We were told we were nuts, that he was qualified and this was not an appropriate use the of the filibuster.
Now I want a apology. An apology from each Democrat that did not support the filibuster. I want an apology from each of those listed below who voted for this loon.
Akaka, Daniel K. (D-HI) Yes
Baucus, Max (D-MT) Yes
Bingaman, Jeff (D-NM) Yes
Byrd, Robert C. (D-WV) Yes
Cantwell, Maria (D-WA) Yes
Carper, Thomas R. (D-DE) Yes
Conrad, Kent (D-ND) Yes
Dorgan, Byron L. (D-ND) Yes
Inouye, Daniel K. (D-HI) Yes
Johnson, Tim (D-SD) Yes
Kohl, Herb (D-WI) Yes
Landrieu, Mary L. (D-LA) Yes
Lieberman, Joseph I. (D-CT) Yes
Lincoln, Blanche L. (D-AR) Yes
Nelson, Bill (D-FL) Yes
Nelson, E. Benjamin (D-NE) Yes
Pryor, Mark L. (D-AR) Yes
Rockefeller, John D., IV (D-WV) Yes
Salazar, Ken (D-CO) Yes
For the next 30 years we are going to have this man taking away our civil liberties, moving our law further away from protecting people and more torwards protecting corporations. All because not enough of our caucus stood up for me.
These Democrats should all be ashamed of themselves, I am ashamed to be a member of the same party as them.
Here is a link to the AP article.
[AP Article]
Update from comments. [h/t BlueTide]
Good heads up diary. You beat me by a few seconds. Here's a supplement to your diary. Part of my diary that I was about to submit.
SUPREME COURT SHIFTS BURDEN OF PROOF TO DEFENSE IN SENTENCING PHASE OF DEATH PENALTY CASES
In Kansas v. Marsh, 04-1170, The United States Supreme Court ruled that states can impose the death penality even when jurors believe that evidence for the defense and prosecution are equal during the sentencing phase. In effect, this ruling allows that states can shift the burden of proof onto the defense during the sentencing phase in Capital Punishment cases.
According to [Yahoo News] By a 5-to-4 vote, the justices said the Kansas Supreme Court incorrectly interpreted the Eighth Amendment's protection against cruel and unusual punishment to strike down the state's death penalty statute.
The dissenters, the four liberal members of the high court, bitterly complained about the decision.
The Kansas court said the state's death penalty law improperly forced jurors to impose a capital sentence even if they believed that the prosecution and defense evidence were equal in weight.
Critics of the ruling stated that the new ruling now creates a general presumption in favor of the death penalty" in the state of Kansas and in fifteen other states.
The ruling is potentially sweeping as the Supreme Court could rule that the presumption of innocence or guilt could be decided by the states. In the United States and most Western Countries, you are presumed innocent unless proven guilty by a beyond of reasonable doubt standard. This ruling could allow states to lower the beyond a reasonable doubt standard to a preponderence of the evidence standard.