Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

deminks

(11,014 posts)
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:28 AM Apr 2017

Neil Gorsuchs very first decision on the Supreme Court was to let a man be killed

https://thinkprogress.org/neil-gorsuchs-very-first-decision-on-the-supreme-court-was-to-let-a-man-be-killed-67aedf3a6d93

Thursday evening, Neil Gorsuch — who occupies a seat on the Supreme Court that Senate Republicans held open for a year until Donald Trump could fill it — cast his first public vote since his ascension to the high Court. Hours later, a man was killed because of Gorsuch’s vote.

The case underlying that vote, McGehee v. Hutchinson, involved eight inmates that Arkansas hopes to execute in eleven days. As Justice Stephen Breyer explains in a dissenting opinion, “the reason the State decided to proceed with these eight executions is that the ‘use by’ date of the State’s execution drug is about to expire.”

In recent years, state death chambers have struggled to obtain the drugs they use to execute inmates because many drug companies refuse to sell drugs for this purpose.

The Court handed down a series of orders denying relief to some or all of these inmates Thursday night, including a 5–4 decision in which Gorsuch cast the tie-breaking vote. Shortly after the Court handed down these orders, Arkansas executed Ledell Lee, its first execution since 2005.

(end snip)

Nice work if you can get it. /sarcasm off.
17 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Neil Gorsuchs very first decision on the Supreme Court was to let a man be killed (Original Post) deminks Apr 2017 OP
Yep... 2naSalit Apr 2017 #1
So proud. SticksnStones Apr 2017 #2
I'm sure there will be a lot more people killed with Gorsuch on the bench OnlinePoker Apr 2017 #3
Don't forget to give some "credit" to Mitch McConnell. Tanuki Apr 2017 #4
Welcome to the Post-2016 Election World. MineralMan Apr 2017 #5
Guess we know where this guy's heart is. democratisphere Apr 2017 #6
Interesting with his views on euthanasia Sienna86 Apr 2017 #7
They're pro-forced-birth, not pro-life. Iggo Apr 2017 #11
It's part of his anti-choice agenda. MoonRiver Apr 2017 #12
Kill. Kill. Kill. Iggo Apr 2017 #8
But Hillary is evil! dbackjon Apr 2017 #9
Not only kill, but do so in cruel and inhuman way. NT HopeAgain Apr 2017 #10
The guy they killed might have been innocent. alarimer Apr 2017 #13
Would that be "pro life" Gorsuch? mountain grammy Apr 2017 #14
It seems like we should have an even number of justices HoneyBadger Apr 2017 #15
Shhh...don't give tRump and the pug majority any ideas Wednesdays Apr 2017 #16
Death MFM008 Apr 2017 #17

MineralMan

(146,314 posts)
5. Welcome to the Post-2016 Election World.
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:32 AM
Apr 2017

The consequences of that election will haunt us for decades to come. Forethought is a good thing. We should try it, I think.

Sienna86

(2,149 posts)
7. Interesting with his views on euthanasia
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:32 AM
Apr 2017

I was wondering if being pro-life in those instances would transfer to capital punishment.

Iggo

(47,554 posts)
11. They're pro-forced-birth, not pro-life.
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 10:54 AM
Apr 2017

They're not even pro-fetus, because if they were, they'd be aaaallllll about free and comprehensive prenatal care for everyone.

But yeah, they're not.

The people who call themselves pro-life are pro-death-penalty, pro-war, anti-welfare, anti-foodstamp, anti-school-lunches...and, well, they are pro- just about everything that kills people and anti- just about everything that keeps people alive.

So yeah, pro-life? No, they're not.

(Okay, I'm done with my rant. Sorry about that. )

MoonRiver

(36,926 posts)
12. It's part of his anti-choice agenda.
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:07 AM
Apr 2017

Pregnant women and dying people don't get to choose. The right wing PTB will choose for them. This also applies to people on death row.

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
13. The guy they killed might have been innocent.
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:07 AM
Apr 2017

But as Scalia said, even actual innocence isn't ground to overturn.

They are in a rush because the drugs are set to expire, which is a stupid and cruel reason.

 

HoneyBadger

(2,297 posts)
15. It seems like we should have an even number of justices
Fri Apr 21, 2017, 11:18 AM
Apr 2017

Make it 10? Ties are not always a bad thing.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Neil Gorsuchs very first ...