In Supreme Court loss, death penalty foes see an opening

Political and Legal News

A strongly worded dissent in the U.S. Supreme Court's narrow decision this week upholding the use of an execution drug offered a glimmer of hope to death penalty opponents in what they considered otherwise a gloomy ruling. One advocate went so far Tuesday as to call it a blueprint for a fresh attack on the legality of capital punishment itself.

But even those who see Justice Stephen Breyer's dissent as a silver lining think it will take time to mount a viable challenge.

And Breyer's words don't change the fact that the Supreme Court has consistently upheld capital punishment for nearly four decades. The five justices forming the majority in Monday's decision made it clear they feel that states must somehow be able to carry out the death penalty.

In disagreeing with the 5-4 ruling that approved Oklahoma's use of an execution drug, Breyer, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, called it "highly likely that the death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment," which protects against cruel and unusual punishment.

"It was a sweeping and powerful dissent that issues an invitation that we should accept, which is to make the case for why today the death penalty itself is no longer constitutional," said Cassandra Stubbs, director of the Capital Punishment Project of the American Civil Liberties Union.

Related listings

  • High court won't hear appeal over Walker campaign probe

    High court won't hear appeal over Walker campaign probe

    Political and Legal News 05/18/2015

    The Supreme Court won't hear an appeal from a conservative group seeking to end an investigation into possible illegal coordination between Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker's 2012 recall campaign and independent groups. The justices on Monday let stand an...

  • Former Assistant Wayne County Prosecutor

    Former Assistant Wayne County Prosecutor

    Political and Legal News 12/05/2014

    No matter the situation, an attorney from the Plymouth Canton Law Office of Rita O. White is available to assist. For everything from questions only a lawyer could answer, to a specific legal issue you may have, we are here to lend a helping hand. Yo...

  • Michigan Defense Lawyer

    Michigan Defense Lawyer

    Political and Legal News 12/05/2014

    The attorneys at the Davis Law Group, PLLC are former prosecutors who have dealt with a wide variety of cases, from minor traffic stops to homicide. As a criminal defense firm, we work in the Metro Detroit area, including Oakland, Wayne, and Macomb C...

Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC

A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party

Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party

However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.