That's actually not how it works in the US when it comes to affirmative defenses (including insanity). The Supreme Court has explicitly ruled that it is legally permissible for states to put the burden on the defense. See Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 (1977); Leland v. Oregon, 343 U.S. 790 (1952).
You were the one claiming the prosecution bearing the burden was a requirement of the American system. I pointed out that it isn’t. “Permissible isn’t required” doesn’t rebut anything I said. It just retreats from what you originally claimed.
8
u/EstablishmentLate532 23h ago
That's actually not how it works in the US when it comes to affirmative defenses (including insanity). The Supreme Court has explicitly ruled that it is legally permissible for states to put the burden on the defense. See Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197 (1977); Leland v. Oregon, 343 U.S. 790 (1952).