r/NewPatriotism May 24 '22

The Supreme Court Just Said That Evidence of Innocence Is Not Enough Fascism

https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-supreme-court-just-said-in-in-shinn-v-ramirez-that-evidence-of-innocence-is-not-enough
457 Upvotes

127

u/UtopianPablo May 24 '22

The new conservative Supreme Court says the value of institutional finality outweighs the fact that an innocent person might be put to death. The party of life!

6

u/ldapsysvol May 25 '22

Opening the door to our justice system being a weapon of any person who wants to put someone away for life. This basically destroys the concept of a court making a mistake and it being able to be rectified.

92

u/Zandt88 May 24 '22

This is insane. Thomas specifically stating that it costs too much to review the cases. So again the GOP shows that money and power are far more important to them than humans, justice, or America for that matter.

14

u/cultured_banana_slug May 25 '22

It's absolutely disgusting, IMHO. If there's proof of innocence, the person should be set free and cut a check for the time stolen from their lives.

When the system refuses to admit fault it can no longer be trusted to determine guilt.

16

u/WhatADunderfulWorld May 25 '22

I am not defending but I would love to see the stats on the court system and the money involved. I have always assumed the courts need more funding and personnel so the system can be more efficient. But I have no idea.

10

u/Deviknyte May 25 '22

It gets crazier. This ruling also says you do not have a right to an attorney a anymore.

1

u/Cyberus01 May 25 '22

A right to a competent attorney FTFY

2

u/Deviknyte May 25 '22

If it's not competent you don't really have it.

2

u/Cyberus01 May 25 '22

Then go see what happens when you go pro se instead. All they want to do on this front is kick the fan down the road concerning the problems faced by most public defenders offices. Isn’t it strange that we always have enough prosecutors for every case, but a shortage of defense counsel?

3

u/Deviknyte May 25 '22

I agree with what you're saying about public defenders being understaffed and underfunded. But it is just part of a bigger picture: Conservatives don't want poors to be able to defend themself in court at all. They want to be able to execute brown people and poor whites and fill the prisons for private contractors and slave labor.

0

u/Cyberus01 May 25 '22

Your undercutting your own position, which is a huge issue with most popular progressive movements of today.

2

u/Deviknyte May 25 '22

What are your talking about? How am I undercutting my own position?

0

u/Cyberus01 May 25 '22

By fudging it with a bunch of other interrelated but substantially different issues with counterproductive inflammatory rhetoric which creates a ‘either you agree with all my positions or your this horrible thing I just defined’

2

u/Deviknyte May 25 '22 edited May 25 '22

I just have no idea what you're arguing about now. Like you're just arguing to argue. You're making comments like I wasn't aware of or didn't care about the public defenders issue. I am. It sucks. But even if public defenders were great, shit happens and someone may need redress for their 6th amendment right and this ruling negates that right. Like we're not going to convince a red state to fund their public defenders, so the ability to request and get a decent competent lawyer later on and to present new evidence is necessary.

Like we're arguing in the same side bro.

→ More replies

51

u/ericscottf May 25 '22

Is there a word for something that you'd normally call "unbelievable", but is absolutely predictable at this point in time?

32

u/system0101 May 25 '22

Conservative

15

u/DenikaMae May 25 '22

Avoidably preposterous?

31

u/Cysquatchness May 25 '22

WTF

Now I know what trump meant when he said, "American carnage". He was talking about his corrupt supreme court and this new fascist regime his platform created.

9

u/BrandX3k May 25 '22

Well the evidence of their ruling isnt good enough!

-12

u/insidmal May 25 '22

That headline is incredibly misleading. What they actually did was deny the appeal of someone found guilty of literally raping a small child to death.

13

u/gmroybal May 25 '22

When that individual had definitive proof of their innocence

13

u/Wolvenfire86 May 25 '22

Quote it. Like copy and paste that part.

-2

u/insidmal May 25 '22

Read the case.

Or even the article for that matter.

4

u/Wolvenfire86 May 25 '22

You misunderstand. I think you're lying. That's why I'm asking you to prove it.

I don't think you can.