So, the Supremes voted 5-4 against an accused Alaskan prisoner's request to PAY FOR HIS OWN DNA TESTING to prove innocence in a rape case.  You can guess who those 5 troglodytes were.

But why oh why did Obama's justice dept. have to sign on to this egregious decision?

As the NYT said today:

We are also puzzled and disturbed by the Obama administration's decision to side with Alaska in this case -- continuing the Bush administration's opposition to recognizing a right to access physical evidence for post-conviction DNA testing.

Moreover, as former FBI Director Williams S. Sessions wrote in Slate on Monday:

It's a generally laudatory goal for a new president to continue the DoJ polices of the previous one when he takes office. But a change in position may be warranted in some cases. Osborne is one of them. The Justice Department's decision is particularly perplexing because when President Obama was an Illinois state senator, he responded to that state's wrongful conviction problem by leading a bipartisan effort to help prevent convictions of the innocent, including laws allowing access to DNA evidence.

Only 4 states refuse to recognize prisoners' rights to DNA evidence, and many states don't even require that it be kept!

You'd think that in a democracy, lawmakers would find it essential to guard citizens from wrongful imprisonment and execution.  In the good old US of A, you'd be wrong, and this Supreme Court decision, aided and abetted by the Obama Justice dept., is another piece of evidence that the land of the free ain't so free . . .