  == Multiple problems ==  There are virtually no citations in this mid-length article to verifiable sources. I am not saying anything in it's inaccurate, but specific related facts need to be cited to a verifiable source, and the text certainly shouldn't be expanded without citing any added text.  In this regard, the opinions of the Supreme Court should constitute excellent sources, to the extent they reflect specific facts.  Without wanting to step on the ongoing editing of others, I have added an example in the article, adding a note to source the date of the incident, and placed the citation in Blue Book form.   The tone of the article, at places, is not encyclopedic.  Wikipedia should not take an editorial stance, even on a matter condemned by 99% of the world.  See WP:MORALIZE   I have removed the full text of the two U.S. Supreme Court opinions from the notes. see WP:NOTREPOSITORY  I replaced the full text (about 71,000 characters) with links to the texts of the opinions at www.findlaw.com and conformed the legal citations to Blue Book form.  The article seems to be getting some editorial attention, so with these obersevations, I am going to let the willing keep at it for now.    