SCOTUS Just Set Up Mitt's Next Run for the White House, Among Other Things

Commenting on decisions handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States (or SCOTUS as the kids like to call it) can be tricky when you're a layperson, i.e. one who tries in general to abide by the law but does not write, enforce, or interpret the law.

But hey, that doesn't mean I won't give it a whirl.

Limiting use of the death penalty was a pleasant surprise. Before I get into that, though, let me state the obvious, although I really shouldn't have to: I will not, and never will, defend child rapists. But state sponsored murder (i.e. capital punishment, the death penalty, etc.) is wrong in general. So I'm glad the Court found an excuse to limit it. Of course, they've also motivated a bunch of lawmakers who want to expand the death penalty as far as they can. So that's nice. Oh, and Judges Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Roberts were in the minority, ready to sponsor as much killing as possible. Those four are dangerous justices, B&E readers.

Cutting the punitive damages on the Exxon Valdez case? Dick move, SCOTUS. That Alaskan community has been decimated, and although ExxonMobil's recent record profits shouldn't necessarily be considered relevant to the case, they fucking earned the requested $2.5 billion in less than a month last year. Shame on you, SCOTUS. This decision was 5-3, with Alito having to recuse himself because he's sitting on a tanker's worth of ExxonMobil stock. Justice Souter demonstrated his New Hampshire libertarian roots by siding with the majority on this one.

The guns ruling today? I don't really know what to say about this one. Gun owners own guns because they're really fun to shoot. Gun control advocates never seem to factor this into their arguments. I'm a supporter of gun control, but it's an issue I gave up on years ago. So today's decision... Surprising? You tell me: our Vice President shot a man in the face and got away with it.

Then there's this campaign finance case. They made some sort of decision that eases restrictions on rich candidates. Mitt Romney, for example, had to disclose a lot of extra information about his run for the White House because he was largely funding it himself. Apparently, those restrictions were limiting his speech. And here I thought his vast personal fortune was what gave him the platform in the first place. I look forward to having my choice in candidates limited solely to entitled, rich bastards.

It's clear now what the Roberts Court is all about. It's stacked with a bunch of right-wing freaks. Adding a touch of reason to SCOTUS sure would be nice. If anyone out there isn't yet sold on Obama over McCain, please take a long look at Justice John Paul Stevens, pictured above for your reference and enjoyment. He's 88. He's almost out-lived a piano keyboard. I don't know how much longer he can hang on.

On the other hand, he's a Cubs fan, and all those old Chicago guys are determined to see the Cubs' next championship. Jesus, if the Cubs win this fall and Stevens kicks it a happy man, we're totally hosed, SCOTUS-wise.