US Supreme Court Should be Ashamed … 5-4 Vote Child Rapists Can’t be Executed

Think Presidential elections do not matter? Who do you think appoints Supreme Court Justices? You best remember this come November! Take a good look how the two Presidential candidates answered the question. Obama has always tapped danced around the death penalty issue like the true leftist that he is. Obama has said that he disagrees with the SCOTUS ruling, yet he is against the death penalty. Meanwhile John McCain stated the following, “As a father, I believe there is no more sacred responsibility in American society than that of protecting the innocence of our children.”

What type of SCOTUS justices do you think each candidate would appoint?

Shame on the US Supreme Court … protecting child rapists as if they are people to. How sick is this that rapist’s rights trump innocent children’s rights? Think Presidential elections do not matter? The liberal judges of the Supreme Court could care less about your children’s rights. Conservative judges like Samuel Alito dissented stating, “The harm that is caused to the victims and to society at large by the worst child rapist is grave.”

The United States Supreme Court voted yesterday, 5–4, that child rapists cannot be executed. Let me first say that they should all hang their head in shame at this heinous ruling. The SCOTUS concluded that capital punishment for crimes against individuals can be applied only to murderers. If the gutless SCOTUS judges want to hide behind the “cruel and unusual punishment” montra, maybe they would like to explain to sexually abused and exploited children everywhere that child rape is not “cruel and unusual” in its own right as a crime. 

Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion that execution in this case would violate the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment, citing “evolving standards of decency” in the United States.

Such standards, the justice wrote, forbid capital punishment for any crime against an individual other than murder.

“We conclude that, in determining whether the death penalty is excessive, there is a distinction between intentional first-degree murder on the one hand and nonhomicide crimes against individual persons, even including child rape, on the other,” wrote Kennedy, who is not related to the convicted rapist.

The case in question before the SCOTUS was in regards to 43 year old Patrick Kennedy who was appealing his case where he raped his 8 year old step daughter in her bed.

Patrick Kennedy, 43, would have been the first convicted rapist in the United States since 1964 to be executed in a case in which the victim was not killed.

Kennedy was convicted of sexually assaulting his stepdaughter in her bed. The attack caused severe emotional trauma, internal injuries and bleeding to the child, requiring extensive surgery, Louisiana prosecutors said.

The liberal judges of the SCOTUS could obviously care less about children and child rape than they do about criminals.

In the majority opinion, Anthony Kennedy acknowledged “the victim’s fright, the sense of betrayal, and the nature of her injuries caused more prolonged physical and mental suffering than, say, a sudden killing by an unseen assassin.”

But the justice — supported by Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer — wrote that when determining what punishment the Eighth Amendment prohibits, “evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society” must be taken into account.