Tue Aug 7, 2012, 07:26 PM
WillyT (45,626 posts)
Fucker... Scalia Denies Stay, Allows Execution of Mentally Retarded Man in Texas
Scalia Denies Stay, Allows Execution of Mentally Retarded Man in Texas
By: David Dayen - FDL Tuesday August 7, 2012 4:13 pm <snip> The Supreme Court justices have jurisdiction over various regions of the country when it comes to injunctions, particularly when it comes to stays of execution. In the case of Marvin Wilson, the mentally retarded man with an IQ of 61 and an intelligence level of a 6 year-old, set to die today in Texas in conjunction with a murder conviction, that appeal had to go through none other than Justice Antonin Scalia. Justice Scalia wrote a dissent in the case of Atkins v. Virginia, which established the ban on executing the mentally retarded (Texas, like other states, got to set their own standards for what constitutes “retarded,” and as such plowed ahead with the execution of Wilson today). Scalia wrote that, because “Only the severely or profoundly mentally retarded, commonly known as ìidiots, enjoyed any special status under the law” in 1791, around the time of the establishment of the Eighth Amendment, he disagreed with the ruling. And so it should come as no surprise that he submitted this short response to the stay of Marvin Wilson today. The application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice Scalia and by him referred to the Court is denied. The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
This condemns a man with a 61 IQ to death. Scalia wrote in his Atkins dissent, “Seldom has an opinion of this Court rested so obviously upon nothing but the personal views of its members.” That’s my sentiment exactly. Scalia has a ruling which clearly states that executing the mentally retarded violates the Eighth Amendment. But Scalia doesn’t agree, so he decided to allow Texas to violate the ruling. Wilson is scheduled to die at this hour. <snip> Link: http://news.firedoglake.com/2012/08/07/scalia-denies-stay-allows-execution-of-mentally-retarded-man-in-texas/ Related Thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021089302
|
32 replies, 2302 views
| Author | Time | Post | |
| WillyT | Aug 2012 | OP | |
| spanone | Aug 2012 | #1 | |
| WillyT | Aug 2012 | #2 | |
| Robyn66 | Aug 2012 | #3 | |
| postulater | Aug 2012 | #4 | |
| Trillo | Aug 2012 | #5 | |
| Odin2005 | Aug 2012 | #6 | |
| hack89 | Aug 2012 | #10 | |
| hack89 | Aug 2012 | #7 | |
| former9thward | Aug 2012 | #9 | |
| KamaAina | Aug 2012 | #12 | |
| hack89 | Aug 2012 | #14 | |
| KamaAina | Aug 2012 | #15 | |
| WillyT | Aug 2012 | #16 | |
| hack89 | Aug 2012 | #17 | |
| WillyT | Aug 2012 | #20 | |
| hack89 | Aug 2012 | #24 | |
| former9thward | Aug 2012 | #8 | |
| KamaAina | Aug 2012 | #11 | |
| xchrom | Aug 2012 | #13 | |
| sofa king | Aug 2012 | #18 | |
| Zoeisright | Aug 2012 | #19 | |
| dsc | Aug 2012 | #21 | |
| WillyT | Aug 2012 | #22 | |
| Goggins | Aug 2012 | #26 | |
| unblock | Aug 2012 | #29 | |
| yawnmaster | Aug 2012 | #31 | |
| AverageJoe90 | Aug 2012 | #23 | |
| Goggins | Aug 2012 | #25 | |
| kestrel91316 | Aug 2012 | #27 | |
| cali | Aug 2012 | #28 | |
| mmonk | Aug 2012 | #30 | |
| Lint Head | Aug 2012 | #32 |
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 07:29 PM
spanone (72,137 posts)
1. my contempt for this man is boundless.
![]() |
Response to spanone (Reply #1)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 07:33 PM
WillyT (45,626 posts)
2. Oh Believe You Me... I'm On The IMPEACH SCALIA Bandwagon In Spades Now
|
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 07:36 PM
Robyn66 (1,658 posts)
3. And this is why
|
I believe the death penalty is 100% wrong regardless of what anyone has done.
First, if its revenge you are after for someone committing a heinous crime, waking up for 40 years in prison is worse than going to sleep IMO. And its because of cases like this. Not to mention the innocent people who have been executed. |
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 07:50 PM
postulater (3,356 posts)
4. The benefit to society is zero by extinguishing this poor soul.
|
Capital punishment is legalized murder.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 08:20 PM
Trillo (7,231 posts)
5. Humans should be kept as indoor-only pets.
|
Our bloodlust puts cats at second place, at best.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 08:31 PM
Odin2005 (48,255 posts)
6. this monster needs to be impeached!
|
|
Response to Odin2005 (Reply #6)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 09:12 PM
hack89 (21,310 posts)
10. What about the others? They only needed four votes
|
to stop the execution. What about the other 6 justices?
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 08:57 PM
hack89 (21,310 posts)
7. It says that he referred the case to the entire court.
|
what was the actual vote? It only takes four justices stop the execution.
|
Response to hack89 (Reply #7)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 09:06 PM
former9thward (6,435 posts)
9. When they deny a hearing to a case they don't release the vote.
Response to hack89 (Reply #7)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 09:16 PM
KamaAina (45,288 posts)
12. Where does it say that?
|
My understanding was, each of the (In)Justices covers one of the nine circuits in cases of emergency appeals like this, and Fat Tony's happens to be the Fifth.
|
Response to KamaAina (Reply #12)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 10:12 PM
hack89 (21,310 posts)
14. In the OP. Read Scalia's statement. nt
|
Last edited Tue Aug 7, 2012, 10:26 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) |
Response to hack89 (Reply #14)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:25 PM
KamaAina (45,288 posts)
15. It doesn't say they voted on it.
|
That's the purpose of having each circuit covered by a Justice (?) for emergencies.
|
Response to KamaAina (Reply #15)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:34 PM
WillyT (45,626 posts)
16. I Still Don't Understand How It Works Exactly, But It Has Something To Do With "The Rule Of Four"
|
Since the Judiciary Act of 1925 and the Supreme Court Case Selections Act of 1988, most cases cannot be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court as a matter of right. A party who wants the Supreme Court to review a decision of a federal or state court files a "petition for writ of certiorari" in the Supreme Court. A "petition" is printed in booklet format and 40 copies are filed with the Court. If the Court grants the petition, the case is scheduled for the filing of briefs and for oral argument.
A minimum of four of the nine Justices are required to grant a writ of certiorari, referred to as the "rule of four". The court denies the vast majority of petitions and thus leaves the decision of the lower court to stand without review; it takes roughly 80 to 150 cases each term. In the term that concluded in June 2009, for example, 8,241 petitions were filed, with a grant rate of approximately 1.1 percent. Cases on the paid certiorari docket are substantially more likely to be granted than those on the in forma pauperis docket. The Supreme Court is generally careful to choose only cases over which the Court has jurisdiction and which the Court considers sufficiently important, such as cases involving deep constitutional questions, to merit the use of its limited resources. See also Cert pool. While both appeals of right and cert petitions often present several alleged errors of the lower courts for appellate review, the Court normally grants review only of one or two questions presented in a certiorari petition. Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certiorari Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rule_of_four And this is interesting (.pdf file): http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/Clinics/Lyle_Denniston.pdf |
Response to KamaAina (Reply #15)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:39 PM
hack89 (21,310 posts)
17. So he referred it to the entire court for shits and giggles? Don't think so.
|
Death penalty cases are decided by the entire court - a writ of certiorari is not an "emergency".
|
Response to hack89 (Reply #17)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:47 PM
WillyT (45,626 posts)
20. So... Why Did Scalia Write This Then ???
|
Last edited Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:50 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1) The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
|
Response to WillyT (Reply #20)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 07:30 AM
hack89 (21,310 posts)
24. So... Why Did Scalia Write This Then ???
|
Last edited Wed Aug 8, 2012, 07:51 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1) and by him referred to the Court
In answer to your original question: Because he could not find four votes to grant the writ of certiorari perhaps? |
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 09:05 PM
former9thward (6,435 posts)
8. Inaccurate headline. This was a SC decision not Scalia.
|
This case was referred to the entire court. The court denied the petition for a writ of certiorari. This means there were not four votes who wished to hear the case.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 09:13 PM
KamaAina (45,288 posts)
11. Note to original headline writer: The term "mentally retarded" is considered offensive.
|
"Man With Intellectual Disability" would have been better.
Note to Scalia: Go fuck yourself with a pineapple. Sideways. |
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 09:19 PM
xchrom (90,641 posts)
13. Some how the Barbarians got throughout the gate
|
& Occupied the SC.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:44 PM
sofa king (8,707 posts)
18. Thus reinforcing his Bush v. Gore decision...
|
... in which he decided an intellectually disabled person could be President.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:47 PM
Zoeisright (7,864 posts)
19. That pig Scalia has a LOT of blood on his hands.
|
Apologies to pigs.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:54 PM
dsc (39,400 posts)
21. To give some mathematical description of just how mentally challenged this prisoner is
|
IQ is normally distributed with a mean of 100 and a standard deviation of 15. His IQ of 61 would equate to a z score of -39/15 which is -13/5 or -2.6. which equates to having only .0047 of the population at his IQ or lower. That means that 47/10000 or .47% of the population has his IQ or lower. Totally shameful.
|
Response to dsc (Reply #21)
Tue Aug 7, 2012, 11:59 PM
WillyT (45,626 posts)
22. Shameful Is Right !!! - Did You Catch The State Of Texas' Steinbeck Angle ???
Response to dsc (Reply #21)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 04:58 PM
Goggins (2 posts)
26. IQ tests
|
He scored a 61 on one of the five IQ tests he took. On all of the other four, he scored above the MR level. The 61 result was on the only test he took after Atkins was decided; that is, when he had quite an incentive to score low.
|
Response to Goggins (Reply #26)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:09 PM
unblock (23,779 posts)
29. well gosh, not much point in giving the test at all if you're just going to dismiss it out of hand.
|
going forward, EVERYONE taking an iq test pursuant to atkins would be subject to the same suspicion.
that may be an reason to stay the execution and repeat the tests, but it is in no way a reason to proceed with an execution. |
Response to dsc (Reply #21)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:28 PM
yawnmaster (2,284 posts)
31. it is amazing to me that 1.4 million people potentially have that IQ or less...
|
that seems like too many...
but statistically, I suppose that is 2.6 stdevs |
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 04:29 AM
AverageJoe90 (5,371 posts)
23. Fat Tony strikes again! nt
|
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 04:55 PM
Goggins (2 posts)
25. Cert denied
|
Last edited Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:01 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2) It is common practice for individual judges to indicate that he or she "would have granted" cert, after cert is denied. In this case, not a single justice so indicated. I guess we have to impeach them all.
|
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:04 PM
kestrel91316 (45,433 posts)
27. What's amazing to me is the sheer numbers of DUers who rend their garments over
|
this execution on the one hand, and on the other hand call for the outright assassination of Jared Loughner, who killed while a raving, untreated paranoid schizophrenic.
Makes me want to |
Response to kestrel91316 (Reply #27)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:06 PM
cali (80,288 posts)
28. excellent observation. me too.
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:12 PM
mmonk (47,307 posts)
30. So when is the Catholic Church going to deny him communion?
Response to WillyT (Original post)
Wed Aug 8, 2012, 05:57 PM
Lint Head (10,443 posts)


