promotion image of download ymail app

Justice Harry A. Blackmun's views on Due Process/ Search and Seizure?

I need to know what Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun thinks of due process or search and seizure, or anything related to the two subjects. If you can add sources.links, that would be very helpful.

1 Answer

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    "I need to know what Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun thinks"

    Well he thought, nto thinks, hes been dead 10 years

    Check out O'Connor v. Ortega & California v. Ciraolo were he was a dissenter or New York v. Burger were he wrote the decison for his baisc thoughs on search & siezure.

    Due process opinoin?

    Try the Congressional Quarterly Researcher, March 10, 1995 Volume 5, No. 9

    I'll quote below:


    Supreme Court Justice Harry A. Blackmun, from an opinion dissenting from the Supreme Court's decision denying review in a Texas death penalty case, Callins v. Collins, Feb. 22, 1994.

    "Bruce Edwin Callins will be executed [tomorrow] by the state of Texas. Intravenous tubes attached to his arms will carry the instrument of death, a toxic fluid designed specifically for the purpose of killing human beings. The witnesses...will behold Callins...strapped to a gurney, seconds away from extinction. Within days, or perhaps hours, the memory of Callins will begin to fade. The wheels of justice will churn again, and somewhere, another jury or another judge will have the...task of determining whether some human being is to live or die.

    We hope...that the defendant whose life is at risk will be represented by...someone who is inspired by the awareness that a less-than-vigorous defense...could have fatal consequences for the defendant. We hope that the attorney will investigate all aspects of the case, follow all evidentiary and procedural rules, and appear before a judge...committed to the protection of defendants' rights...

    But even if we can feel confident that these actors will fulfill their roles...our collective conscience will remain uneasy. Twenty years have passed since this court declared that the death penalty must be imposed fairly and with reasonable consistency or not at all, and despite the effort of the states and courts to devise legal formulas and procedural rules to meet this...challenge, the death penalty remains fraught with arbitrariness, discrimination...and mistake...

    From this day forward, I no longer shall tinker with the machinery of death. For more than 20 years I have develop...rules that would lend more than the mere appearance of fairness to the death penalty endeavor...Rather than continue to coddle the court's delusion that the desired level of fairness has been achieved...I feel...obligated simply to concede that the death penalty experiment has failed. It is virtually self-evident to me now that no combination of procedural rules or substantive regulations ever can save the death penalty from its inherent constitutional deficiencies... Perhaps one day this court will develop procedural rules or verbal formulas that actually will provide consistency, fairness and reliability in a capital-sentencing scheme. I am not optimistic that such a day will come. I am more optimistic, though, that this court eventually will conclude that the effort to eliminate arbitrariness while preserving fairness 'in the infliction of [death] is so plainly doomed to failure that it and the death penalty must be abandoned altogether.' (Godfrey v. Georgia, 1980) I may not live to see that day, but I have faith that eventually it will arrive. The path the court has chosen lessen us all."

    also check his written for the majority decisons in

    Kentucky Dept. Of Corrections v. Thompson

    Revere v. Massachusetts General Hospital

    Olim v. Wakinekona

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.