When pro-murderer justices seek -- often successfully -- to focus upon criminals rather than crimes, the result is to grant certain perpetrators greater protection against punishment for their brutality than others who commit identical or less serious acts. As detailed elsewhere, pro-murderer media suppression of the truth has played a major role in enabling a wholesale evisceration of capital punishment. Justice Sonia Sotomayor recently provided a graphic example, one that would be excruciatingly painful to survivors of murder victims if they knew about it. Many people unfamiliar with the practices and philosophy of the Supreme Court would very likely be shocked to learn just what values some justices hold.<< MORE >>

The history of liberal judicial activism has largely been a history of Republican handiwork -- in case after case after case, impacting all areas of law (including public safety, crime and capital punishment). The most important reason for conservatives to support Mitt Romney is that he is not Barack Obama, period. Never before has there been an American president ashamed of his own country. Never before has there been a president with complete contempt for the political and economic principles that made it great. << MORE >>

The ObamaCare decision exposed the Supreme Court as an emperor without clothes. Hoping for deliverance from ObamaCare, many usual critics defended the Court. But with a new term fast approaching, a month before a critical election, Chief Justice Roberts’ handiwork should be remembered as a final wake-up call to consider, once and for all, whether the Court and judicial review merit respect, acceptance and legitimacy. Upon Paul Ryan’s vice presidential selection, supporters noted his objection that Chief Justice Roberts had “contort[ed] logic and reason to come up with [the ObamaCare] ruling.” Such contortion is nothing unusual except for one thing. The Supreme Court, which normally operates in obscurity, could not escape a glaring spotlight this time, affording a rare opportunity to inform the public about the dark side of what many justices do. This raises questions concerning the utility of elections, what remains of our actual Constitution, the rule of law, and public acceptance of judicial review. << MORE >>

This is the strongest argument against the death penalty, or one of them, as if it is correct they can convince an unelected supreme court to subdue the death penalty. Anti-Death penalty groups such as the Death Penalty Information Center (DPIC) try to capitalize on these arguments all the time. I think this is the vilest strategy of the abolitionist crowd. However, their claims are all false, and as usual the abolitionist crowd is good at ignoring facts. << MORE >>

SUMMARY: The cost errors, within the Majority Report, are so substantial that their cannot be considered reliable. Is it possible that a properly managed death penalty system could be less expensive than a true life sentence? Read on. Some observations on the Urban Institute (UI) Cost of the Death Penalty in Maryland (1) as well as on the Majority Report. << MORE >>

NOTE: Clark is a Calif. ACLU activist and The California Commission on the Fair Administration of Justice's (CCFAJ) is a Calif. government commission. Clark's/CCFAJ's cost review is wildly inaccurate and misleading. I doubt that there is any more veracity to the death row costs than with their lifer cost evaluations. None of Clark/CCFAJ's numbers can be relied upon. Clark/CCFAJ says: "In total, California's death penalty system costs taxpayers $137 million per year. Contrast that with just $11 million per year if we replace the death penalty with permanent imprisonment." << MORE >>

I. Introduction The claim the death penalty (may be referred to, as the title already does, “DP”) costs to much is one of the most common claims about the death penalty. The history of it really began in 1970 when abolitionists began to back down from morality claims as they had little ground to stand on. So they decided to take a whack at the administrative “problems” of the DP, such as race, innocents, and costs. We will only look into costs in this article to make it simpler. << MORE >>

A stunning 7,900-word New York Times article paints a murderer as a sympathetic victim, with little concern for murder victims and their loved ones. The pro-murderer movement hits the big time. A recent 7,900-word New York Times article singularly illustrates the huge gulf between victims of barbaric crime and the zealous rationalizers of their victimizers. Strongly suggesting that a prisoner's being "sorry" for the premeditated murder of both his parents should be "enough" to free him, the article would likely repulse most survivors of violent crime, including loved ones of murder victims and others who care about them. Repulse, but not surprise. << MORE >>

In protecting deceit of the people, the Chief justice has committed a frontal assault on the democratic process, smashing to smithereens his grandiloquent bromide disavowing Court vigilance regarding their alleged political choices. Collateral damage has resulted from Chief Justice Roberts' validation of ObamaCare's assault on individual freedom, the economy, and the country. The comity and unity of the law's opponents have been shattered, as they have been bitterly divided between his critics and defenders. << MORE >>