Are Supreme Court justices here to lead or to follow?

0 Comments | Insight on the News, July 22, 2002 | by Wayne Lela

In ruling that the execution of the mentally retarded is cruel and unusual punishment that violates the Eighth Amendment and thus must be considered unconstitutional, the Supreme Court majority said something truly disturbing. To wit: "The [Eighth] Amendment must draw its meaning from the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."

The six justices who favored that ruling effectively are saying that they have no moral standards--they are just following the lead of our evolving society. (It seems to me that whatever punishment we mete out to dangerous, murderous people--such as life in prison--could be considered cruel and unusual.)

But if these justices really don't have any moral standards and merely are following society's lead, then they clearly don't deserve their positions. In fact, if all they have to do is follow, then almost anybody can take their place and do their job.

Wayne Lela
Woodridge, Ill.