HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Editorials & Other Articles (Forum) » Elena Kagan Has Had Enoug...

Mon May 17, 2021, 07:45 PM

Elena Kagan Has Had Enough of Kegger King Kavanaugh's Judicial "Scorekeeping"

Last year, the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision in Ramos v. Louisiana, prohibiting non-unanimous convictions of criminal defendants. Under the Constitution, the court declared, a split jury verdict is “no verdict at all.” On Monday, however, the Court walked back this declaration. In Edwards v. Vannoy, the conservative majority held that Ramos does not apply retroactively—that is, to defendants who have already been convicted by split juries. The court then took the extraordinary step of overturning precedent that had allowed retroactive application of new decisions. No party asked the Supreme Court to reverse this precedent; the question was not briefed or argued. But Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s majority opinion reached out and grabbed it anyway, slamming the courthouse door on convicted defendants seeking the benefit of a new Supreme Court decision.

Kavanaugh’s overreach drew a sharp dissent from Justice Elena Kagan, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer. But there is more to Kagan’s dissent than her usual rejoinders and witticisms. The justice also responded to Kavanaugh’s charge that she is a hypocrite, criticizing his cynical view of “judging as scorekeeping.” It appears that Kagan is losing patience with Kavanaugh’s efforts to “insulate” himself from criticism with rhetoric that obfuscates the cruel consequences of his decisions.

Edwards dashes the hopes of criminal defendants who thought they received a lifeline in Ramos. By any standard, Ramos was a momentous decision: In his opinion for the court, Justice Neil Gorsuch declared that a jury verdict does not qualify as a conviction under the Sixth Amendment unless it is unanimous. At that time, only Louisiana and Oregon still allowed split verdicts, and Ramos decision applied to defendants in both states who had not yet received a “final criminal judgment.” This group included defendants who had not yet received a trial as well as defendants contesting non-unanimous convictions on “direct appeal,” meaning they had not finished their first round of appeals. Those folks can get a new trial.

But what about the many more defendants who had previously appealed their non-unanimous convictions and failed to win relief? These individuals can only launch a “collateral appeal,” or an attack on the legality of a final conviction, to demand a new trial. Both Congress and the Supreme Court have strictly limited collateral appeals, because they prefer that “final judgments” remain final. (They are also afraid that these appeals will expose egregious injustices that undermine the integrity of countless convictions, but that’s a conversation for another day.) In 1989’s Teague v. Lane, the Supreme Court identified two types of decisions that apply retroactively on collateral review: new substantive rules (like those protecting some individual liberty) and new “watershed” rules of criminal procedure. (A quintessential example of such a “watershed” rule is the right to court-appointed counsel established in 1963’s Gideon v. Wainwright.) The question in Edwards was whether Ramos announced such a rule.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/elena-kagan-has-had-enough-of-brett-kavanaughs-judicial-%e2%80%9cscorekeeping%e2%80%9d/ar-BB1gQ4Rs

11 replies, 4516 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 11 replies Author Time Post
Reply Elena Kagan Has Had Enough of Kegger King Kavanaugh's Judicial "Scorekeeping" (Original post)
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin May 17 OP
madaboutharry May 17 #1
MerryHolidays May 17 #2
pandr32 May 17 #3
gopiscrap May 17 #11
Warpy May 17 #4
hibbing May 17 #6
onecaliberal May 17 #7
wnylib May 17 #8
ShazzieB May 17 #9
drray23 May 17 #10
Auggie May 17 #5

Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Mon May 17, 2021, 07:49 PM

1. Kavanaugh revealed himself as a cruel and selfish sociopath at his confirmation hearing.

"When people show you who they are, believe them the first time." - Maya Angelou.

There isn't anything more to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Mon May 17, 2021, 08:03 PM

2. +1000000000 to the infinite power squared to you and Maya Angelou nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Mon May 17, 2021, 08:06 PM

3. Yep!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madaboutharry (Reply #1)

Mon May 17, 2021, 10:31 PM

11. exactly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Mon May 17, 2021, 08:10 PM

4. I hope someone is researching how half a million in debt suddenly disappeared

shortly before McConnell rammed him though the Senate without vetting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Mon May 17, 2021, 08:35 PM

6. 1+

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Mon May 17, 2021, 08:59 PM

7. Been asking that question since his appointment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #4)

Mon May 17, 2021, 09:07 PM

8. Kavanagh needs to be investigated

for many things - the didappearance of that debt and his behavior toward Dr. Ford which never really was investigated during his hearing.

Is there some way to get him off the court if investigations turn up criminal behavior?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to wnylib (Reply #8)

Mon May 17, 2021, 09:14 PM

9. Impeachment...but I don't know how that works or what the criteria would be for expulsion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ShazzieB (Reply #9)

Mon May 17, 2021, 10:17 PM

10. the same way as for a president or judge.

majority in house, 2/3 in senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin (Original post)

Mon May 17, 2021, 08:11 PM

5. What happened to investigation(s) of his suspected confirmation perjury?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread