That could be a point raised with respect to the ultra-massive judgment against Alex Jones. The comparison to the Boeing judgment shows the injustice of it.
The entire point seems to be to punish Alex Jones for who he is, not what he has done.
For criminal fraud that directly led to the deaths of 346 people, multi-billion-dollar corporation Boeing will be fined one fifth of what Alex Jones was ordered to pay for say something he later retracted and apologised for. https://t.co/B0R7EDQt2r pic.twitter.com/avoN74Yi6i
— RAW EGG NATIONALIST (@Babygravy9) July 8, 2024
Another case from the Democracy and Rule of Law Party, aka Democrats
Write for me a blog post which discusses the law concerning cruel and unusual punishment and the US Constitution's Bill of Rights.
The United States Constitution's Bill of Rights, specifically the Eighth Amendment, guarantees that no one shall be subjected to cruel and unusual punishment. This amendment has been the cornerstone of many legal battles concerning the death penalty, prison conditions, and other forms of punishment in the US.
The concept of cruel and unusual punishment dates back to the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which sought to limit the power of the monarchy. The Framers of the US Constitution recognized the importance of this protection and incorporated it into the Bill of Rights.
The definition of what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment has evolved over time. The Supreme Court has ruled that punishments must not be "barbaric," "excessive," or "inconsistent with evolving standards of decency." This means that punishments that were once considered acceptable, such as public flogging or branding, are now deemed unconstitutional.
The death penalty, in particular, has been a contentious issue in the US. While the Supreme Court has not abolished capital punishment outright, it has placed significant limitations on its use. For example, in Furman v. Georgia (1972), the Court held that the death penalty, as applied, constituted cruel and unusual punishment due to its arbitrary and capricious nature. This decision led to a nationwide moratorium on executions that lasted until 1976 when Gregg v. Georgia upheld the constitutionality of new, more stringent death penalty statutes.
The Court has also ruled on the conditions of confinement in prisons. In Estelle v. Gamble (1976), the Court held that deliberate indifference to a prisoner's serious medical needs constituted cruel and unusual punishment. This decision has led to significant improvements in prison healthcare.
However, the Eighth Amendment has its limits. It does not guarantee prisoners a "comfortable" life, but rather a life free from cruel and unusual punishment. Prison overcrowding, for example, has not been found to violate the Eighth Amendment, as long as basic human needs, such as food, water, and sanitation, are met. In conclusion, the Eighth Amendment of the US Constitution's Bill of Rights plays a crucial role in protecting individuals from cruel and unusual punishment. Its interpretation has evolved over time, reflecting societal changes and advancements in understanding what constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. The amendment has had a significant impact on the death penalty, prison conditions, and other forms of punishment in the United States, ensuring that punishment remains proportional to the crime and does not violate evolving standards of decency.
Comment:
So-called "conspiracy theorist" Alex Jones is forced to pay more than Boeing is forced to pay, even though Jones was not responsible for Sandy Hook. How is this kind of judgment in keeping with the Bill of Rights, which forbids "Cruel and Unusual Punishment"?
The punishment for Alex Jones, even if just, is vastly excessive.
Alex Jones ordered to pay $473M more to Sandy Hook families https://t.co/sQPmZz07x4 Comment: Punishment is more severe than for Boeing, who actually was responsible for hundreds of deaths. Jones killed nobody.
— BootsandOil (@BootsandO6892) July 10, 2024
No comments:
Post a Comment