By requiring that an execution be relatively painless, we necessarily protect the inmate from enduring any punishment that is comparable to the suffering inflicted on his victim. This trend, while appropriate and required by the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, actually undermines the very premise on which public approval of the retribution rationale is based.

After all, a district judge who gives harsh sentences to Yankees fans and lenient sentences to Red Sox fans would not be acting reasonably even if her procedural rulings were impeccable.

It is not our job to apply laws that have not yet been written.

The level of discourse reaching a mailbox simply cannot be limited to that which would be suitable for a sandbox.

To show a well-founded fear of persecution, an alien need not prove that it is more likely than not that he or she will be persecuted in his or her home country.

Requiring that an execution be relatively painless...actually undermines the very premise on which public approval of the retribution rationale is based.

When the commission finds that a pig has entered the parlor, the exercise of its regulatory power does not depend on proof the pig is obscene.