While everyone remains trigger happy about a ruling that just means that Fred Thompson and Robert Byrd can now have a pistol duel on the Capitol steps that would make Alexander Hamilton and Aaron Burr feel like the morons from L’Executer, the Supreme Court made an even bigger doozy this morning.

Exxon Valdez now must pay 1/10^th of its punitive damages from an original amount of $4.5 billion to only $530 million. In the spill, Valdez had dumped 11 million US gallons of crude oil and contaminated about 1,300 miles of coastline, killed 500,000 seabirds, nearly 3,000 sea otters, 300 harbour seals, 250 bald eagles and up to 22 killer whales.

Will money bring back the Alaskan seabird? Will it bring back memories of the orca whale? No, but that’s why they’re called punitive damages, and the Supreme Court clearly thinks time erases mistakes.

By a 5-3 vote, the court ruled the original amount was excessive under federal maritime law. In the majority opinion, judge David Souter concluded that damages should be cut to the amount of “actual harm.” As he wrote, “We … hold that the federal statutory law does not bar a punitive award on top of damages for economic loss, but that the award here should be limited to an amount equal to compensatory damages.”

The damages would have been awarded to the 32,000 commercial fishermen, Alaskan property owners, natives and others harmed by the most devastating environmental sea disaster in recent history. At the height of the response, more than 11,000 personnel, 1,400 vessels and 85 aircraft were involved in the cleanup.

2,000 Alaskan plaintiffs have been waiting for their compensation since 1994. The Supreme Court’s action will reduce the average award from $75,000 to about $15,000.

Despite the extensive cleanup attempts, a study conducted by NOAA determined that as of early 2007 more than 26,000 U.S. gallons of oil remain in the sandy soil of the contaminated Alaskan shoreline, declining at a rate of less than 4% per year.

A spokesman for the Alaska department of environment said efforts to steer the Valdez back into the narrow shipping lane was like “trying to park a Cadillac in a Volkswagen spot”.

Exxon Mobil, the most profitable company in the United States, subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing it had already paid more than $3.5 billion for the spill.

Souter and the Court have seemed to champion capitalism and amnesia today.

Tom Donohue, president of the US Chamber of Commerce, said: “This is good news for companies concerned about reining in excessive punitive damages.”

Good news for big business, bad news for those afflicted with its malfeasance, and an even adverse effect on federal maritime law.

The ruling “makes a mockery of justice,” argued John Passacantando, executive director of Greenpeace.

Even more troubling, according to the BBC, Exxon captain, Joseph Hazelwood, was drinking vodka before boarding the vessel. And although the Valdez was repaired and renamed the Sea River Mediterranean, it is banned from returning to Alaska

In Alaska, Riki Ott, a fisherman, scientist and environmental activist in the Prince William Sound town of Cordova, where most of the area’s fishing fleet is concentrated, was disappointed.

“We were really counting on punitive damages paying for our long-term losses in the fishery. That’s obviously not going to happen,” Mr Ott said. “Well, that’s an affront to everyone’s sense of justice.”

In 2007, Exxon Mobil made just over $40 billion in profit. This means the oil company will be able to pay the punitive damages in only four days.

And I beg you to watch this video, the headline, and incredible sense of inequity will make more sense.