 After addressing the matter of fundamental rights, the Court delineated the rationale behind its decision.It first turned to the long-standing legal tradition of looking to a person's intent as a way of distinguishing between two acts with identical physical consequences.For example, a person who accidentally kills a pedestrian while blinded by the sun might only face punishment for vehicular manslaughter, while a person who intentionally and purposefully kills another with his car could be punished for murder.