Death Penalty for Juveniles

The US Supreme Court has spoken.

Juveniles may not be put to death in the United States. The Supreme Court noted that the US stood alone among civilized nations - no others allow execution of juveniles. Years ago, when the Supremes last considered this issue, there were only a handful of such countries, and they read like a rogue's gallery - China, Iraq, North Korea, etc. Now it is just the USA.

The Supreme Court noted also that even in the USA, 30 states of the 50 reject capital punishment for juveniles. Only 20 states allow it.

The Court then noted that this marks "the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society." (a majority opinion quote of an earlier Justice Earl Warren statement).

I do not have a strong opinion on the execution of juveniles. I can listen to and understand arguments on either side. I guess I tend to be more of a 'law and order' sort and in general don't have a problem with the death penalty in loose terms - but I do have a problem with the inequitable way in which it is applied - so I'm also in favor of moratorium until we sort this out. Pretty wishy-washy.

However, I do have an opinion on the Supreme Court measuring the zeitgeist. That opinion is that they should not do it.

The Supreme Court has an important job. They are to interpret the meaning of the US Constition, and to interpret the intent of lawmakers with regard to laws of the United States. That is pretty much their whole job.

They are not a finger in the air. Their job is not to figure out which direction our nation is headed and and help us along that path. Their job is not to decide when the US is out of step with the rest of the world.

Frankly, I don't much care if the USA stands alone on any issue - if that's the law, then that's the law. If it was the intent of Congress or the intent of the Framers of the Constitution, then that's the way it is, my little malchicks.

There are ways to fix broken laws or laws that no longere represent the will of the people. If they are mere laws, then Congress can change them. If they are enshrined in the US Constitution via the Bill of Rights, then the various and several States can create an Amendment, pass it, and then the will of the people will have been amended.

But it is not, and has never been, the job of the US Supreme Court to make law based on what the currently-fashionable trend might be.

Oh, yes - I will get email on this - and many will wring their hands at me and sob that the death penalty is wrong and that we are barbaric for imposing it - and you know what? You don't get it. Even if I agreed with that - which I don't - my point is and remains that it is not the job of the US Supreme Court to decide that based on public opinion. But idiots don't care about that, because all they want is what they want - who cares if it rips the guts out of the US Constitution?

Lawmakers put their fingers in the air and decide which way the winds of public opinion are blowing - they respond accordingly by proposing and passing laws to that effect. The executive affirms by signing those bills into law. The courts DO NOT MAKE LAW. How hard is this?

Best,

Wiggy