The U.S. Supreme Court, in its now common ruling of 5 to 4 -- the five being the well-known conservatives on the bench -- has ruled that someone convicted under old DNA technology, or before the technology was even available, cannot request new testing.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote: The availability of conclusive DNA testing "cannot mean that every criminal conviction, or even every criminal conviction involving biological evidence, is suddenly in doubt."
But wouldn't we want to know if the correct person is sitting in jail and use every resource at our disposal, being a democracy and a nation that respects and honors the rule of law? Wasn't that the intent of the development of DNA testing since eyewitness testimony has proven so many times to be flawed if not complete lies?
Another ruling that is disturbing, and again was the usual 5-to-4, now puts the burden of proof on an older worker to prove he or she was fired for age, not the other way around where the employer had to prove that the firing was not due to the worker's age. Now it will be easy for an employer to simply get rid of someone because they are older, and "older" will be completely up to the interpretation of the employer. This ruling is particularly egregious as so many baby boomers are approaching retirement age, and many can't retire due to the state of our economy. What a better way to help employers not have to pay pensions! They will simply fire the person before they are eligible.
This country and its compassionate nature, as well as its longstanding adherence to the rule of law, has been very good to these gentlemen. They have a good paying job for life, if they want it, plus that job brings them the best healthcare in the world for the rest of their lives.
It is very hard to understand where these justices are coming from when only five people make these cruel decisions for the rest of us -- and we number in the millions, growing each day.
-- Carolyn Crandall, Camarillo