What about the Supreme Court´s DNA?

The United States Supreme Court recently found, in its infinite wisdom, that long-term prisoners have no inherent right to the use of DNA evidence proving them innocent.  Our Supreme Court itself needs to have its DNA checked, except that in the Court´s case DNA stands for Dismaying Non-constitutional Attitude.  The immense damage which George W. Bush did to this nation by appointing John Roberts to be Chief (In)Justice lives on!

The reasoning for this atrocious denial of fundamental constitutional and human rights to many prisoners, who were convicted before DNA evidence techniques were available to exonerate them, is that it would be too upsetting to our judicial system to do the right thing and free them.  Better to continue unending punishment of the innocent than to grant them the fundamental due process they obviously deserve.  One is led to wonder whether John Roberts and the other four justices who were in the majority on this horrid (but close) decision can actually see the horns and forked tails they have when they look in the mirror, or indeed if they have any reflection at all.

The good news, though, is that only one case from Alaska was decided here (not so good for the probably-innocent man whose attorneys brought his case before the Court).  Once President Obama gets his new Supreme Court nominee in place, and then hopefully replace one or two more aging justices during his term or terms in office, other innocent prisoners will be enouraged to seek redress from a new Supreme Court, which, unlike the present majority, has some common sense and common decency.