Obama Disagrees With Supreme Court Ruling Requiring a Death to Invoke the Death Penalty

Where is Sen. Barack Obama on the death penalty? With Justices Alito, Scalia and Thomas. Here is what Sen. Obama had to say about today's excellent Supreme Court ruling striking down a state statute allowing the death penalty to be imposed for crimes where no death occurs:
When asked about Supreme Court ruling against the use of the death penalty in instances of child rape today at a news conference in Chicago, Obama answered, “I disagree with the decision. I have said repeatedly that I think that the death penalty should be applied in very narrow circumstances for most egregious of crimes. I think that the rape of a small child, six or eight years old is a heinous crime, and if a state makes a decision that under narrow, limited, well-defined circumstances, the death penalty is at least potentially applicable. That does not violate our constitution.”
He continued, “Had the Supreme Court said, ‘We want to constrain ability of states to do this to make sure that it's done in a careful and appropriate way,’ that would've been one thing, but it basically had a blanket prohibition and I disagree with that decision.”
He sounds just like John McCain: [More...]
McCain’s Senate office sent out a similarly worded statement: “As a father, I believe there is no more sacred responsibility in American society than that of protecting the innocence of our children. I have spent over 25 years in Congress fighting for stronger criminal sentences for those who exploit and harm our children. Today’s Supreme Court ruling is an assault on law enforcement’s efforts to punish these heinous felons for the most despicable crime. That there is a judge anywhere in America who does not believe that the rape of a child represents the most heinous of crimes, which is deserving of the most serious of punishments, is profoundly disturbing.”
Disappointing? Yes. Predictable? Also yes.
I wonder whether this means that the pro-death penalty stance John Kerry insisted be removed from the Democratic party platform in 2004 will be making a return. I don't doubt it.
Obama mischaracterizes today's decision as a state's rights issue. It's not. It's an 8th Amendment issue of cruel and unusual punishment in which the evolving standards of decency of a civilized nation must be taken into account. The Supreme Court ruled based on such standards and its own precedent:
The constitutional prohibition against excessive or cruel and unusual punishments mandates that the State’s power to punish “be exercised within the limits of civilized standards.”
....Evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society counsel us to be most hesitant before interpreting the Eighth Amendment to allow the extension of the death penalty, a hesitation that has special force where no life was taken in the commission of the crime. It is an established principle that decency, in its essence, presumes respect for the individual and thus moderation or restraint in the application of capital punishment.
...As it relates to crimes against individuals, though, the death penalty should not be expanded to instances where the victim’s life was not taken.
| < LAPD Policy Banning Citizenship Inquiries Withstands Challenge | Supreme Court: Second Amendment Conveys Individual Right to Bear Arms > |





