Supreme Court says states can limit scope of insanity defense

[Polybius]

Source: USA Today

WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states have broad authority to define insanity in their criminal codes.

The 6-3 ruling was written by Associate Justice Elena Kagan, a liberal who sided with the court's five conservative justices. Associate Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a spirited dissent, joined by Associate Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.

The case dealt with a quadruple murder committed by a Kansas man seeking to use an insanity defense. But the problem for James Kahler – who admitted to killing his estranged wife, mother-in-law and two daughters in 2008 – was that Kansas abandoned that defense a decade earlier.

To win a conviction, the state needed only prove that Kahler acted with intent – not that he necessarily understood right from wrong.

Read more: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/03/23/insanity-defense-supreme-court-lets-states-make-harder-prove/2898915001/

---

6-3 opinion, Kagan joined the conservatives.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

1. It was not the usual split.

Linked from https://www.scotusblog.com/:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-6135_j4ek.pdf

KAGAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS, C. J., and THOMAS, ALITO, GORSUCH, and KAVANAUGH, JJ., joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which GINSBURG and SOTOMAYOR, JJ., joined.

[Polybius]

4. I wonder why Kagan sided with the conservatives

Breyer seemed like he hated this decision.

[former9thward]

9. She wrote the decision.

She did not just side with them.

[Polybius]

11. So they sided with her?

The other liberals were very much against this. Looks like most of us were.

[former9thward]

13. This was a case on criminal law.

Very often in criminal cases, ideology at the SC goes out the window. You don't see the liberal/conservative splits you might see in what is called "social justice" cases. Justice Scalia, for example, wrote some of the best criminal rights cases the SC has produced.

[bucolic_frolic]

2. Politicizing psychology

Expert testimony from psychologists and psychiatrists is now legal in some states, but illegal in others.

I mean I'm glad because psychologists have too much power and often the best power that only lots of money can buy, but if this logic were applied to accountants, 1+1 = 2 in most states, but in others it could total something else.

[ck4829]

3. I think we actually need this

Last edited Mon Mar 23, 2020, 01:51 PM - Edit history (1)

If a defendant is contributing to his defense and is aiming to make an insanity defense... then he’s probably not mentally ill enough to not know the difference between right and wrong.

And while the concept of the insanity plea shouldn’t be scrapped entirely, the concept does lead to a notion that the mentally ill are violent when they are more often to be the victims of crime rather than perpetrators of it.

Also, this isn't drapetomania or sluggish schizophrenia, this guy is a real piece of filth. I'm against the death penalty in all cases, so I hope he spends the rest of his life behind bars.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. "This case arises from a terrible crime."

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-6135_j4ek.pdf

{scroll down to page 8}

This case arises from a terrible crime. In early 2009, Karen Kahler filed for divorce from James Kahler and moved out of their home with their two teenage daughters and 9-year-old son. Over the following months, James Kahler became more and more distraught. On Thanksgiving weekend, he drove to the home of Karen’s grandmother, where he knew his family was staying. Kahler entered through the back door and saw Karen and his son. He shot Karen twice, while allowing his son to flee the house. He then moved through the residence, shooting Karen’s grandmother and each of his daughters in turn. All four of his victims died. Kahler surrendered to the police the next day and was charged with capital murder.

[Roy Rolling]

6. Terrible Decision

We don’t need 50 separate definitions to define “insanity” in a legal sense. Why is it so difficult to understand “United States” means we have one definition for scientific and medical facts, nationwide.

The juggling of medical facts is why COVID-19 response is so inadequate. I don’t want each state defining legal/medical terms.

[Polybius]

7. Why did Kagan side with the 5 idiots?

Has she given a good reason?

[former9thward]

10. Read the decision she wrote and you will know the reason.

[Polybius]

12. I did

But I'd like to talk about why she felt that way. No one is really talking about it. When Roberts joins with the liberals, Republicans go apeshit.

[Polybius]

8. Does anyone know why Kagan sided with the conservatives?

No one here has brought it up.