This will be one of those rare times when I disagree with my good friend whoop.
With this horrible decision, the first in what will be incremental steps in abolishing capital punishment, any murderer will simply claim "insanity," and they get off.
This case was based on a Virginia inmate convicted of a 1996 murder. He is said to have an IQ of 59. Does anyone really believe he did not know what he did?? Whoop and Mr.MBM, whould you like to explain your opinions to the victims family??
I believe in a "eye-for-an-eye" justice system. You are competent enough to take a life, you are competent enough to lose your own.
Mr. MBM, you are correct in questioning the reasoning behind the decision. The high court's job is not to interpret the law based on popular opinion. I see a dangerous precedent in the making for future decisions in other cases. Think about it. Suppose popular opinion reverts back to pre-civil wartime that blacks are inferior and do not deserve citizenship. Does this give the high court the right to deny blacks citizenship and send us back to Africa?
"That's crazy, Bankins! That won't happen!" Maybe not, but Lincoln was prepared to ship all the former Negro slaves back to Africa!
In 1989 this court declared executions of the mentally retarded constitutional. Now they say it's unconstitutional. I don't feel comfortable with this kind of wishy-washy reasoning when it's the Constitution that stands between myself and a tyrannical government, and this is the way the court interprets that document....,
....By popular demand!!
Maybe next, "by popular demand", they will declare the Electoral College unconstitutional.