Kansas v. Marsh — Stevens, J., dissenting

Summary

Justice Stevens dissents, arguing the Court should not have granted certiorari because the case involved review of a state court ruling that provided more protection than the Federal Constitution required, a situation warranting judicial restraint. He further criticizes the majority for upholding Kansas's statutory tie-breaker rule that mandates death when aggravating and mitigating factors are in equipoise, contending such a rule violates the Eighth Amendment requirement for a reasoned moral response.