Fuck Alabama, and Fuck SCOTUS

[TwiceHorn 31868]

1 minute ago, Fozzz said:

Obviously you understand that, which is why you said "I assume the next non-Christian inmate up for execution in Alabama will raise this issue in a more timely fashion and the result would be as indicated:  clergy of choice or none at all." lol

Which defends this decision how exactly?  Stays of execution get limited review.  Challenge the statute outside that context, it gets review and the desired outcome.

[TwiceHorn 31868]

1 minute ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

I couldn't care less whether or not someone's imaginary-friend-go-between is provided for death row inmates or not.  

My issue is the DP, in general.  It's bullshit and should be abolished. 

Totes.

[immortal13 4059]

I hope he rots in hell or wherever the fuck he thinks he's going. 

[Horn Dog 10123]

Until we hear from the true intellectual giant of the SCOTUS, Justice Clarence Thomas, then we will never know the legal complexities and nuanced reasoning which lead to this decision 

[Horn Dog 10123]

7 minutes ago, immortal13 said:

I hope he rots in hell or wherever the fuck he thinks he's going. 

Hear hear!  

The policy should be that if you want a religious figure at your execution, you get a court apppointed nondenominational spirtual leader who will be instructed to read a up to 100 word passage from your holy book of choice.  If that is unacceptable, you get a picture of your victim(s) and the sobbing cries of their families.

[Fozzz 152]

39 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Which defends this decision how exactly?  Stays of execution get limited review.  Challenge the statute outside that context, it gets review and the desired outcome.

Again, as noted by Kagan in her dissent, in order to vacate the stay of execution granted by the 11th Circuit, SCOTUS needed to find that the 11th Circuit abused their discretion in granting the stay.  That's a fairly high bar to clear.  What error did they find in the 11th circuit's decision?  The only rationale the majority provides is that Ray waited too long to seek relief, which is bullshit in light of when Ray first had cause to seek relief (there was nothing in the statute to put him on notice that he would need to seek relief and the denial of his request was five days before he sought relief).

[wildcat09 29509]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

Which defends this decision how exactly?  Stays of execution get limited review.  Challenge the statute outside that context, it gets review and the desired outcome.

I don't see how given the facts of this situation the guy had any possible alternative context in which to challenge. 

[RDCanecutter 26771]

17 hours ago, Zepol87 said:

 

Can I use this for my tinder bio??

 

Yes. If you use this photo:

[Gil Bang 26164]