# SCOTUS Finds Death Penalty for Those Under 18 Unconstitutional

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-finds-death-penalty-for-those-under-18-unconstitutional/292484>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [March 1, 2005, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-finds-death-penalty-for-those-under-18-unconstitutional/292484 "2005-03-01T20:43:19Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 3\
**Page:** 6

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2005, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-finds-death-penalty-for-those-under-18-unconstitutional/292484/101 "2005-03-07T02:31:47Z")

</div>

> [@ElvisL1ves](#):
>
> You state that as if you believe there is not only such a thing as objective correctness about matters not susceptible to the scientific method, or objective persuasiveness, to which your access is superior to that of the Supremes. It ain’t. You have an opinion, they have theirs. Theirs rules. That’s how the system works. Deal with it. The saying goes, “They’re not last because they’re right, they’re right because they’re last”.

The OP seemed to be inviting opinions and a discussion on this topic. That’s all I was trying to do.

I’m not saying my position is superior to that of the majority in this case. I am saying it is at variance with my reasoning, for the reasons I gave. I have good reasons for believing such, shared by others here.

Last I checked, people were still allowed to disagree with majority Supreme Court decisions. Indeed, four members of the Court did disagree in this case, and a swing of one vote would have made all of the difference.

It has been the case in the past that dissenting opinions are remembered and cited more than the majority position. It’s something to think about, especially when the majority opinion is based on such a flimsy and overreaching rationale.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2005, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-finds-death-penalty-for-those-under-18-unconstitutional/292484/102 "2005-03-07T02:39:53Z")

</div>

I meant to say it has **sometimes** been the case in the past…

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Honesty](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/f04885/32.png) [@Honesty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Honesty)\
**Post date:** [March 7, 2005, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-finds-death-penalty-for-those-under-18-unconstitutional/292484/103 "2005-03-07T03:58:10Z")

</div>

Wow,

Scalia wrote a dissenting opinion that actually made sense. I expected a bunch of sarcasm and his typical whydonttheyagreewithme whine, but he wrote a sensible opinion backed by well-reasoned arguments. I certainly don’t agree that children should be killed. On the other hand, Scalia’s rhetoric is pretty darn persuasive.

- Honesty

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/scotus-finds-death-penalty-for-those-under-18-unconstitutional/292484.md?page=5)