pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
 ·Comcast
| reply to ff1324
Re: why not just build it?
said by ff1324  :they [The Courts] do not draft new legislation. They don't draft it, they just make it up.
Things like the Kelo decision, getting rid of the death penalty for minors, requiring the PGA to allow for exceptions for physically unqualified athletes and other such rulings have no basis in the Constitution, but are law now nonetheless.
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
| said by pnh102 :Things like the Kelo decision, getting rid of the death penalty for minors, requiring the PGA to allow for exceptions for physically unqualified athletes and other such rulings have no basis in the Constitution, but are law now nonetheless. The death penalty ruling is the courts exercising their duty to interpret the Constitution Amendment 8, "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." They can define cruel and unusual punishment however they want. It's subjective and that subjectivity is the burden of the courts. You can agree on the ruling or not, but it's certainly their ball to play.
I know nothing about the basis of the physically unqualified athletes case, but I'm sure if you read the judges rulings they filed it explains that basis of their reasoning for that decision.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter
»www.cafepress.com/maxolasersquad
»maxolasersquad.com/
»maxolasersquad.com/network/ My DSL Network Guide
»myspace.com/mlsquad |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| said by Maxo :The death penalty ruling is the courts exercising their duty to interpret the Constitution Amendment 8, "nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." They can define cruel and unusual punishment however they want. Except when the Constitution makes very clear that a person may be deprived of life through due process of law. As a result, the death penalty is not "cruel and unusual" punishment. Look at this another way. There are 12 states which do not impose the death penalty for any crime. An activist opinion on the Supreme court say, with full legality, that these bans are illegal and these states must impose the death penalty.
said by Maxo :I know nothing about the basis of the physically unqualified athletes case, but I'm sure if you read the judges rulings they filed it explains that basis of their reasoning for that decision. And its perfectly wrong, because the Constitution does not grant the government the power to regulate the rules of professional sports. Come to think of it, I will go sue the NBA so that I can play even though I am nowhere close to being physically able to play any professional sport 
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
ff1324
Everybody Goes Home
Premium
join:2002-08-24
On Four Day
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :Things like the Kelo decision, getting rid of the death penalty for minors, requiring the PGA to allow for exceptions for physically unqualified athletes and other such rulings have no basis in the Constitution, but are law now nonetheless. Again, they have not written NEW legislation. They have ruled on the interpretation of EXISTING legislation. No NEW law has been created. They do NOT just "make it up."
--
The funny thing about firemen...night and day they're always firemen
»www.stlfire.com |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs:
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :Except when the Constitution makes very clear that a person may be deprived of life through due process of law. As a result, the death penalty is not "cruel and unusual" punishment. Look at this another way. There are 12 states which do not impose the death penalty for any crime. An activist opinion on the Supreme court say, with full legality, that these bans are illegal and these states must impose the death penalty. Last time I checked the US still implements the death penalty.
--
"Padre, nobody said war was fun now bowl!" - Sherman T Potter
»www.cafepress.com/maxolasersquad
»maxolasersquad.com/
»maxolasersquad.com/network/ My DSL Network Guide
»myspace.com/mlsquad |
|
pnh102
Reptiles Are Cuddly And Pretty
Premium
join:2002-05-02
Mount Airy, MD
·Comcast
| said by Maxo :Last time I checked the US still implements the death penalty. The US Federal Government, military, and all but 12 states have a death penalty.
»www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article···&scid=11
--
Only SHATNER is Kirk. |
|
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| reply to pnh102
said by pnh102 :Things like the Kelo decision, getting rid of the death penalty for minors, requiring the PGA to allow for exceptions for physically unqualified athletes and other such rulings have no basis in the Constitution, but are law now nonetheless. Of the three, the death penalty case is probably the best argument that the court "made up law" even though it is based in an interpretation of the 8th amendment.
Kelo: Ruled that there was not existing law forbidding what happened in Kelo and that the redevelopment project did not compose a takings under the 5th amendment. No existing law made such a project a "takings" (and it is actually common for laws to elevate certain types of permissable public use to a takings, like Measure 37 in Oregon). Overturning the actions in Kelo would have been much close to "made up law". Still, the "public purpose" test used in Kelo is akin to "made up law", but since there was no existing law to create a test between public and private use, something had to be implemented either way.
Death Penalty: The ruling focused on the death penalty for minors. At the time of the ruling, the United States was the only country in the world that still legally allowed the execution of minors and carried out such executions (Somalia was the only other country not to ratify the Rights of the Child treaty, but still outlaws child executions, Bangladesh allows the practice, but has not executed a minor in 20 years and did ratify the Rights of the Child treaty). The big disagreement in the Supreme Court was whether the cruel and unusual standard applies under modern standards, or whether it has to be applied to standards that existed when the bill of rights was ratified. Otherwise, O'Connor was the only justice who argued that under current standards execution of a minor is not cruel and unusual punishment. Scalia believed that only the legislature could change the standards of cruel and unusual from those that existed when the bill of rights was ratified.
PGA (Casey Martin): Ruled that the PGA was required to allow Martin to use a golf cart as an accomodation for his handicap in order to perform his job as walking between holes was not as essential component of the athletic competition. The PGA is cleary engaging in interstate commerce and subject to ADA. Unlike you playing in the NBA, Martin qualifed for the PGA tour and thus clearly demonstrated he had the physical skills to play professional golf, (and even the physical skills to walk between holes0 He just could not walk between holes without taking a significantly higher risk of death than other golfers. In other words, Martin was not a "physically unqualified athlete". He proved his qualifications in tour qualifying. The existing law (ADA) was applied.
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher |
|
Maxo
Your tax dollars at work.
Premium,VIP
join:2002-11-04
Tallahassee, FL
clubs: | reply to pnh102
So we are in agreement. The Supreme Court has not overruled that a person may be deprived of life through due process of law. |
|
