Roper was decided correctly for the reasons previously mentioned. Under the legal framework there was the place for respected opinions. Kennedy used the respected opinions to inform the evolving standards framework.
The Supreme Court did the right thing. I'm surprised that anyone could be against either the result or method that the court used to reach this result. For sure, there could be a better test than the evolving standards test, but I haven't heard any of the naysayers offer one. I also haven't heard the naysayers criticize Scalia for using the same test. I haven't heard the naysayers criticize Scalia for not following it all too well. That is what is so surprising about the dissents and the people who are upset with the outcome of this case.
Related Posts
Roper 3: International Law and the Juvenile Death Penalty
Roper 2: Domestic Cases informing Roper
Roper Part 1: Introduction: Significance of Domestic and International Law Jurisprudence
International Law and the Supreme Court
Not Suprised
Off the Boat and Swimming with Mermaids
The Slap Dance
A Pie in their Faces
Wednesday, March 02, 2005
Roper 4: Concluding why International Law was necessary in Roper
-x-
