Title : The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench."
link : The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench."
The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench."
First sentence: "The Supreme Court continued its trend late Thursday night of allowing federal executions to go forward, with new Justice Amy Coney Barrett participating in her first capital punishment case on the court."In 1998, she co-wrote a law review article, titled “Catholic Judges in Capital Cases,” that described the tensions. She suggested judges who felt they could not be impartial because of their faith should recuse and wrote, “Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.”
Questioned about that when she was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Barrett, then a Notre Dame law professor, said she would not be willing to enter an order of execution if she were a trial judge, but it was different for appellate judges considering issues of law in the case of someone already on death row.
It's interesting how some hypocrites justify their views, as a strong Catholic, it peculiar how she is comfortable deviating from Church doctrine for capital punishment, but is rigid when it comes to an abortion that may save the life of the mother or who has become pregnant through rape or incest.I find hypocrites like Amy Coney Barrett pretty repugnant.
Legally, there's no hypocrisy. Both positions represent judicial restraint — deference to legislative choices. If there were no right to have an abortion, it would be left to legislatures to regulate access to abortions, and judges would merely be allowing those statutes to be enforced. Similarly, the death penalty is available only where statutes provide for it.
I understand the enthusiasm, among liberals, for attacking the new Supreme Court Justice, but the hypocrisy charge is unsound, and, ironically, it's hypocritical to attack her for not using her religion as a basis for decisions in the case of the death penalty. At the confirmation hearings, she was attacked for seeming as though she might allow her religion to affect her decisions.
In 1998, she co-wrote a law review article, titled “Catholic Judges in Capital Cases,” that described the tensions. She suggested judges who felt they could not be impartial because of their faith should recuse and wrote, “Catholic judges (if they are faithful to the teaching of their church) are morally precluded from enforcing the death penalty.”
Questioned about that when she was nominated to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, Barrett, then a Notre Dame law professor, said she would not be willing to enter an order of execution if she were a trial judge, but it was different
It's interesting how some hypocrites justify their views, as a strong Catholic, it peculiar how she is comfortable deviating from Church doctrine for capital punishment, but is rigid when it comes to an abortion that may save the life of the mother or who has become pregnant through rape or incest.I find hypocrites like Amy Coney Barrett pretty repugnant.
Legally, there's no hypocrisy. Both positions represent judicial restraint — deference to legislative choices. If there were no right to have an abortion, it would be left to legislatures to regulate access to abortions, and judges would merely be allowing those statutes to be enforced. Similarly, the death penalty is available only where statutes provide for it.
I understand the enthusiasm, among liberals, for attacking the new Supreme Court Justice, but the hypocrisy charge is unsound, and, ironically, it's hypocritical to attack her for not using her religion as a basis for decisions in the case of the death penalty. At the confirmation hearings, she was attacked for seeming as though she might allow her religion to affect her decisions.
Thus articles The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench."
You now read the article The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench." with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2020/11/the-first-and-last-sentences-of.html
Related Posts :
New York Times: U.S. Military And The C.I.A. Must Now Obtain White House Permission To Attack Terrorism Suspects Away From War Zones
Why Iran Refused Biden’s Invitation To Negotiate
"A study published in PLOS One suggests that the type of fiction a person reads affects their social cognition in different ways."- "I originally saw this story somewhere other than WaPo that had pictures of the pastor, unlike WaPo, which just shows this skinny cross."
After Repeated Delays The U.S. Air Force Says Its First Hypersonic Missile Will Occur Within 30 Days
0 Response to "The first and last sentences of a Washington Post article titled "Supreme Court continues capital punishment trend with Barrett on the bench.""
Post a Comment