Update: Where ‘States Rights’ Sometimes Get Complicated
It looks like there is an update to the post I made back in April, Where ‘States Rights’ Sometimes Get Complicated.
Even though the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the death penalty was too severe of a sentence for those found guilty of child rape, it appears that many state legislatures will remain steadfast in introducing and attempting to pass laws that provide these offenders with the toughest possible sentencing guidelines.
I was quite surprised Supreme Court was able to develop a majority opinion (5-4) that essentially removed the rights of individual states to determine what is ‘just punishment.’
Even though this was a huge victory for many on the far-left and certain religious types, I was pleased to see how John McCain and Barack Obama addressed this case:
Republican Sen. John McCain called the ruling “an assault on law enforcement’s efforts to punish these heinous felons for the most despicable crime.” Democratic Sen. Barack Obama said there should be no blanket prohibition of the death penalty for the rape of children if states want to apply it in those cases.
I have to admit, I was quite pleased to see Barack Obama make this statement. All too often to Democratic candidates succumb to the pull of the far-left fringe, and it usually comes back to haunt them, especially in middle America.
Obama’s statement makes me wonder what how he would prioritize the view of states rights when it comes to picking his Supreme Court Justice should he be elected. Would it be more important than a potential nominees stance on abortion? Gay rights?
I think it would be an interesting question to be presented to the candidates in a debate, “if you were given the task of picking a Supreme Court nominee during your presidency, list the top three ideological viewpoints that you would be looking for, in order, based on priority.”
Hopefully if they do another YouTube debate, someone can sneak in a question like this. Maybe the snowman.