3/02/2005 10:40:00 AM|||Joe|||It seems that every time the Supreme Court makes a ruling, people accuse them of legislating from the bench.

I think those people don't appreciate what can be a muddy issue.

Anyway, I'm not sure what to make of this decision. While I oppose the death penalty, what's more at issue is whether or not to interpret the constitution in light of public opinion.

I've only skimmed the opinion and dissents, but I actually found Kennedy, O'Connor and Scalia all to be very persuasive (though I think Scalia was being a little inflammatory when he said “... [T]he meaning of our Eighth Amendment ... should [not] be determined by the subjective views of five Members of this Court and like-minded foreigners...”). It just goes to show, I think, that reasonable and intelligent people can disagree.

Whereas the majority of commentary I've seen on this decision goes to show that unreasonable people are less concerned with the reasoning behind a decision then they are with the decision itself. And so they sound dumb.

I was also happy to see that Kennedy was the swing vote.|||110978916439248136|||Roper v. Simmons