McKenzie v. McCormick
Headline: Court declines to review a death-row appeal, leaving the inmate’s death sentence in place while two justices said they would have overturned it and thrown out the sentence.
Holding: The Court denied review of a death-row case, leaving the defendant’s death sentence intact while Justice Kennedy did not participate and two Justices dissented, saying they would have vacated the sentence.
- Leaves this individual’s death sentence in place while appeals continue.
- Keeps the broader constitutionality of the death penalty unresolved nationally.
- Justice Kennedy’s nonparticipation affected the Court’s vote.
Summary
Background
A person convicted and sentenced to death asked the Supreme Court to review their case after the Ninth Circuit. The Court issued a brief order denying review, and Justice Kennedy did not take part in the consideration or decision. Two Justices wrote that they would have granted review and acted to set aside the death sentence.
Reasoning
The central question was whether the high court should take up the case and, if so, whether the death sentence should be overturned. The Court declined to hear the case and gave no opinion explaining its reasons in the short order provided. In contrast, Justices Brennan and Marshall explained that they believe the death penalty is always cruel and unusual punishment barred by the Constitution and that they would grant review and vacate the death sentence for that reason.
Real world impact
Because the Court refused to review the case, the individual’s death sentence remains in place for now. The denial does not decide the larger constitutional question about the death penalty nationwide and leaves the issue open for future cases. Justice Kennedy’s nonparticipation is noted and affected the Court’s tally on whether to hear the case.
Dissents or concurrances
Both dissents are short but clear: Justice Brennan and Justice Marshall each said they would have granted review and would have vacated the death sentence, with Marshall also citing separate earlier reasons he had given in another case.
Opinions in this case:
Ask about this case
Ask questions about the entire case, including all opinions (majority, concurrences, dissents).
What was the Court's main decision and reasoning?
How did the dissenting opinions differ from the majority?
What are the practical implications of this ruling?