Interesting news that Justice Alito’s first decision on a case went against conservatives:
New Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito split with the court?s conservative wing Wednesday night, refusing to let Missouri execute a death-row inmate contesting lethal injection.
Alito, handling his first case, sided with inmate Michael Taylor, who had won a stay from an appeals court earlier in the evening. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas supported lifting the stay, but Alito joined the remaining five members in turning down Missouri?s last-minute request to allow a midnight execution.
Not much in the way of news about his vote and why he voted this way but ScotusBlog has some added information:
Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., one day after joining the Court, cast his first significant vote on Wednesday evening, and in the process split with the Court’s other conservatives: Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
Those other tthree wanted to nullify an Eighth Circuit Court order delaying the execution of a Missouri death row inmate. The state’s request to lift that stay order went initially to Alito, who is assigned to handle such emergency matters from the Eighth Circuit. He passed the matter on to his eight colleagues, resulting in the vote to leave the lower court stay in place.
The order made no mention of Alito not participating — such a notation would have been added had he opted not to vote on the matter (Crawford v. Taylor, application 05-A-705). Earlier in the day, he did not participate in at least one of the other orders in the Missouri case, casting a vote — along with all of his colleagues — on that particular maneuver. The apparent unanimity that time seemed to suggest the matter had little real significance.
There was no explanation for the final order leaving the stay in place — the latest in a flurry of last-minute pleas from the inmate, Michael Taylor, and from the state of Missouri. Taylor had been scheduled to be executed at midnight. Like other death row inmates who have been filing eleventh-hour pleas to the Court over the past week, Taylor is seeking to challenge Missouri’s use of lethal injection as its execution method. There has been no consistency in the results these pleas have drawn from the Court.
This is mildly disturbing news, especially given the fact that the appeal is based on the same ole race card crapola:
Separately, the court acting without Alito rejected Taylor?s appeal that argued that Missouri?s death penalty system is racist. Taylor is black and his victim was white. He filed the appeal on Tuesday, the day that Alito was confirmed by the Senate to replace Justice Sandra Day O?Connor.
?The death penalty as practiced in the state of Missouri discriminates against African-Americans such as (Taylor), such that it is a badge of slavery,? the justices were told in a filing by Taylor?s lawyer, John William Simon.
Taylor?s legal team had pursued two challenges ? claiming that lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment and that his constitutional rights were violated by a system tilted against black defendants.
Kent Scheidegger, legal director of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, a pro-death penalty group, said Taylor had only a long-shot appeal because of federal limits on when courts can hear final pleas from death row inmates.
?The constant filing of new legal proceedings drags cases out forever and effectively negates the death penalty. That?s exactly what Congress wanted to stop,? he said.
If he feels that lethal injection is cruel, why don’t they just put a bullet into his head? Quick and painless. Cheaper too, the bullet would cost maybe 25 cents. I mean come on, does this guy sound like he deserves any mercy?
Ann Harrison disappeared from her family?s east Kansas City driveway March 22, 1989. She was found stabbed to death the next night in an abandoned stolen car.
Taylor and Roderick Nunley, both of Kansas City, were arrested several months later. Both confessed to police that they raped Harrison before stabbing her multiple times. Both pleaded guilty without benefit of a plea agreement with prosecutors.
Michael Taylor, 38, pleaded guilty to first-degree murder, forcible rape, armed criminal action and kidnapping for the March 1989 killing of Ann Harrison. Court documents state that Ann, 15, was waiting for her school bus when Taylor and his accomplice, Roderick Nunley, forced her into their stolen vehicle. According to court records, Taylor raped Harrison in Nunley’s mother’s basement and Nunley facilitated the rape and then helped Nunley kill her because they were afraid she would identify them. Nunley entered guilty pleas to first degree murder, for which he was sentenced to death; armed criminal action; kidnapping; and forcible rape. Nunley pleaded guilty to the four charged offenses without a sentencing recommendation from the state, which had indicated it would seek the death penalty even if he pleaded guilty. Both were sentenced to death in 1991 and then, after their sentences were overturned, were again sentenced to death in 1994.
UPDATE
Apparently there is some confusion because there have been a few news stories stating that the vote was 9-0, and some were 5-4. The confusion stems from the fact there were 3 decisions today surrounding this case.
The first was the state appealing a stay of the execution itself. Weird since the stay was going to expire this afternoon anyways. The court ruled 9-0 to NOT lift the stay.
The 2nd case was this scumbag appealed his sentence because he felt it was racist. The court ruled 8-0 to NOT grant the stay based on this (Alito did not vote).
The 3rd case was this scumbag was appealing his sentence based on cruel and unusual punishment. The court voted 6-3 to UPHOLD this request….ARGH!
Apparently Alito believes that it’s worth the time to hear this silly argument.
UPDATE
Interesting discussion going on over at NRO:
[Jonathan Adler? 02/02 09:45 AM]
Ed may be right that the record is ambiguous, but according to two reports we know that Justice Alito did participate in orders after being sworn in, including another order relating to the same case. We also know that it would be customary to indicate that Justice Alito did not participate if that were the case, and there was no such indication. Assuming this is the case, does it matter? Not really. Justice Alito was on the Court for scarcely a day when this occurred, and the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals (which is the circuit to which Alito is assigned) had voted for the stay 9-1. Assuming that Alito is generally skeptical of many last minute death row petitions, it would certainly be prudent not to dissent on one?s first week on the job, particularly in a case in which one?s vote would not make a difference. So, I don?t think it is fair to see the vote as having any ideological significance. If anything, it is just further evidence that Justice Alito is a cautious, prudent jurist ? something his supporters have maintained all along.
[Ed Whelan? 02/02 09:54 AM]
Jonathan, I agree with you that it would be insignificant if Alito did vote not to vacate the Eighth Circuit’s stay. Just to clarify my earlier point: As I see it (and I invite correction from anyone more knowledgeable about the practices of the Supreme Court’s clerk’s office), the order entered in the case would be the same whether or not Alito voted. In either event, the order would not state that Alito did not participate because he did participate: the application was initially filed with him and he referred it to the full Court.
[Ed Whelan? 02/02 05:54 PM]
I stand corrected: More learned Supreme Court counsel advise me that it is fair to infer that Justice Alito voted on the application to vacate the Eighth Circuit’s stay of execution.
On the eminently reasonable (but not compelled) assumption that Alito voted with the majority, his vote is entirely unremarkable. Alito had earlier that same day just been designated Circuit Justice for the Eighth Circuit. The Eighth Circuit had voted 9-1 to stay the execution. Alito was encountering the Court’s arcane practices in capital cases for the first time. In these circumstances (and completely apart from the merits of the matter, which I haven’t looked at), a decision not to vacate the Eighth Circuit’s stay order is eminently understandable.
After a day of reading about his decision I feel much better now.? It appears he was being cautious, and that is completely understandable for his first day on the job.
See author page
I first read this on Michelle Malkin’s blog, but didn’t get the details until I came here.
On the one hand I’m not thrilled with the ruling either, but on the other it makes the liberals who tried to demonize him look like idiots.
Oh wait, that’s already been covered.
I am an old friend of Ann Harrison’s little sister. I find this ruling disturbing. They are debating that lethal injection is too painful. Who cares? These men didn’t care how much pain Ann was in when they were raping her and beating her to death. Why does anyone care how much pain he is in? And I guess the fact that he is black and Ann is white is someone else’s fault. I guess if I were to start a campaign about how white women should protect themselves from black men I would be ridiculed but it’s okay for people to protect a black man from execution because he raped and murdered a white woman.
The SC won’t be hearing the argument. The 8th Circuit, which voted 9-1, will hear the argument. Alito just voted to let them.
Also, the vote was 6-3, not 5-4 so Alito’s vote wasn’t the deciding vote. (http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/13769593.htm)