If judges are not trusted to make fair decisions in death penalty cases, why should they be trusted to make decisions on constitutional issues in other cases?

The interesting focus of the today's U.S. Supreme Court's decision striking the death penalty regime in Florida is that judges were given more power than juries in death penalty cases.

Here is the full opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court in Hurst v Florida.  It has just come out, I will take my time analyzing it, but will post analysis on this blog.

Is the highest court admitting now that judges may be not as fair as juries on important issues?

If judges should not be given too much power in death penalty cases, why should they be given absolute power to decide family court custody and child neglect cases where fundamental constitutional rights to rear a child are involved?