Vaermina
Well worn.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2015
- Messages
- 6,121
- Likes received
- 69,202
That's not allowed.OL said "essentially." He isn't quoting the law as written in the proper legalese; he's giving the short version. What this law likely does is define a sentencing guideline -- instead of the choices being "life imprisonment" or "death" a sentencing judge can now choose "death, commuted to life imprisonment unless the criminal escapes from prison." This remains constitutional as long as the judge is allowed to use discretion in which of these three sentences to hand down.
The Federal Death Penalty is a unique beast that can only be handed out by a unanimous jury verdict. Once that verdict is received, the judge is not allowed to reject or modify it in the manner you described.
While I understand what you're going for.I'll credit you that this one is very borderline. It probably wouldn't fly at all in US Prime. But US Prime doesn't have people with disorders that make them chronically incapable of making moral judgments, who are also them a clear and present danger to the public for an indefinite amount of time, who also cannot be restrained through normal means. US 16 clearly does, and I would expect jurisprudence there to have evolved differently as a result.
Honestly, this one's more of a plot hole in the underlying DC setting. The fictional definition of "insane" is completely bonkers. The Joker is not insane -- he's intelligent enough that he should be able to understand the consequences of his actions. He's capable of long-term planning, so his actions aren't the result of an inability to control his impulses. He is aware of his own actions. Whatever mental illness he has, he isn't insane -- he isn't incapable of forming intent.
But if we were to grant that Batman's rogues gallery is full of people who really are so insane that they don't know that what they're doing is wrong, then what this law is establishing is a class of mental illness that is such a grave threat to public safety that lethal force is statutorily considered a defensive act. It isn't a criminal death penalty; it's a legal recognition of a clear and present danger.
This is very much one of those "no exceptions allowed" bits of US constitutional law because allowing any exceptions is the equivalent of jumping off the cliff government abuse wise.