Editorials

EDITORIALS: Connecticut's The Day Calls for Retroactive Death Penalty Repeal

When Connecticut abolished the death penalty in 2012, it did so prospectively, leaving its death row population in place. Now, Connecticut newpaper The Day is calling on the state to "have the courage and consistency to outlaw government sanctioned killing in all instances." The editorial first highlights the paper's longstanding opposition to capital punishment, saying "It remains our position that a state-sponsored execution disproportionately targets minorities, has no deterrent value, cannot be undone if there is a mistake and is a barbaric act that lowers the state to the level of the killer." It then draws on recent events to point out the practical problems with Connecticut's execution method, lethal injection. "The Department of Correction has confirmed it has none of these drugs and no way to obtain them because many domestic and foreign drugmakers, including those in the 28-nation European Union, have objected to using their products in executions." The editorial closes by mentioning the ongoing court case challenging the consitutionality of Connecticut's current death penalty law, saying "The likelihood is that none of the 12 [men on death row] will ever be executed and some court, state or federal, will find, as Michael Courtney, the state's head of the Office of Public Defender, has said, "there is nothing more arbitrary and capricious" than the present situation in which a person committing a capital felony on April 24, 2012, the day before Connecticut abolished capital punishment, can be executed while the person committing the exact same crime the next day cannot." Read the full editorial below.

EDITORIALS: "State-Sponsored Horror in Oklahoma"

A recent New York Times editorial described the "horrific scene" of Clayton Lockett's botched execution and called on Oklahoma to "[follow] other governors and legislatures in banning executions, recognizing that the American administration of death does not function." The editors noted the Oklahoma Supreme Court's temporary halt to the execution and pointed to political pressure as a possible explanation for why the Court then allowed it to go forward: "[S]everal lawmakers threatened to impeach the justices, and Gov. Mary Fallin blindly ignored the warning signs and ordered the execution to proceed." The editorial stated, "Mr. Lockett’s ordeal, along with the botched deaths of other inmates around the country, showed there is no reliable and humane method of execution." The Times critiqued not only the secrecy surrounding the source of the lethal injection drugs used, but also the larger systemic problems of the death penalty, such as arbitrariness and wrongful convictions. They cited a new study that found over 4% of death-sentenced defendants are likely innocent. Noting the growing number of jurists and lawmakers who are calling for a moratorium on the death penalty because of its exceptional cost, the editorial concluded, "The 'exceptional cost' refers not just to dollars and cents. It refers to the moral diminishment of the United States when a man dies by the hasty hand of government, writhing in pain." Read the editorial below.

EDITORIALS: "New Hampshire Should Abolish Death Penalty"

In advance of a New Hampshire Senate vote expected on April 17, the Boston Globe published an editorial calling on their neighboring state's legislators to support repeal of capital punishment. The editorial highlighted the bipartisan support for abolition in the New Hampshire House, and Gov. Maggie Hassan's pledge to sign the repeal bill if it passes the Senate. Among their reasons for endorsing the measure, the Globe said, "Death-penalty prosecutions are expensive, verdicts often reflect racial bias, and there’s little evidence that executions actually deter violent crime." Moreover, the editorial continued, "[A] state with a libertarian heritage like New Hampshire’s should regard with deep suspicion a punishment that can only make sense if the government has the right suspect 100 percent of the time." In response to the argument that prosecutors need the death penalty as a bargaining tool, the editors said, "[T]hat’s among the weakest of reasons to keep the death penalty, because it could serve to coerce an innocent or less culpable defendant into taking a plea bargain just to avoid the possibility of death." Read the editorial below.

EDITORIALS: Mississippi Paper Calls Pending Execution "Gravely Inhumane"

A recent editorial in the Jackson Free Press in Mississippi called for a halt to the scheduled execution of Michelle Byrom, saying she is "clearly not guilty of the crime for which the state plans to execute her next week." The editorial noted that Byrom's son had confessed to the crime four times." He said the story he originally told sheriffs implicating his mother was made up because he was "scared, confused and high" when he was interrogated. The paper pointed to mitigating evidence about Byrom that could have been considered by a sentencing jury: "Byrom suffered a lifetime of abuse that had a jury heard about it could have been sufficiently mitigating for her to receive life imprisonment rather than death for the capital offense of murder-for-hire." The editors concluded: "It would be gravely inhumane to execute a woman as mentally and physically ill as Michelle Byrom—and a frightening contrast to all the brutal woman-killers that previous Gov. Haley Barbour pardoned....To execute Michelle Byrom for a crime that she did not commit would be one of the worst miscarriages of justices in modern Mississippi history. This execution must not happen." Read the full editorial below.

EDITORIALS: Washington Paper Backs Governor's Moratorium and Now Supports Repeal

In an editorial supporting Washington Governor Jay Inslee's recently-announced death penalty moratorium, the News Tribune (Tacoma) said its editorial board "has grown increasingly uncomfortable with capital punishment in recent years, and we now share Inslee's feeling that Washington should move beyond it." The paper said the governor's decision "forced a welcome new discussion" of capital punishment. While acknowledging the heinousness of many crimes, the editorial disagreed that killing is the answer: "Opponents of the death penalty, including us, must look the evil square in the face while saying that execution is not a moral prerogative of the state." It highlighted the inconsistencies of the death penalty and its high cost. The editors praised Washington for only using the death penalty rarely, but said, "We don’t think it’s a big leap to go from rare to never." Read the editorial below.

EDITORIAL: "Proposal to Speed Up Death Penalty Appeals Troubling"

A recent editorial in the Montgomery Advertiser criticized a proposal by Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange to speed up death penalty appeals. His proposed legislation would require two parts of the appeal process to essentially run concurrently. The editorial cautioned that lack of adequate representation for death penalty defendants would make the accelerated process more problematic. The paper concluded, “Anything that smacks of haste in capital punishment cases is inherently troubling. This is a difficult issue for the Legislature to tackle, especially in an election year, when emotion and political expediency can form a dangerous combination. If there was ever a time for sober, somber, serious debate of an issue, with an unblinking recognition of what is really at stake, surely this is it.”  Read the editorial below.

EDITORIALS: Expanding Conservative Concerns About the Death Penalty

A recent editorial in the Dallas Morning News highlighted the voices of prominent conservatives who now oppose capital punishment, including former Texas Congressman Ron Paul and conservative political leader Richard Viguerie. The paper noted the new partnership between the student-centered organization Young Americans for Liberty and Conservatives Concerned About the Death Penalty. The editorial described why one Texas conservative, Pat Monks, a Republican precinct chairman in Harris County (Houston), changed his mind on the death penalty: "Ultimately .... [t]he impossibility of eradicating human error from the system hit home to him.... he came to see no deterrent value for a punishment that’s imposed unevenly at an intolerable expense to the public.” Read the full editorial below.

NEW VOICES: Deputy Editor Dissents from Toledo Blade's Support for Death Penalty

Jeff Gerritt is the Deputy Editor of the Toledo Blade, a paper which has supported Ohio's death penalty for years. Disagreeing with the paper's Editor, Gerritt called for repeal of the death penalty in the state, noting the risk of executing the innocent, "Wrongly convicting anyone constitutes a horrible injustice, but executing the wrong person eliminates any chance of reversing the error. Nationwide, more than 140 people awaiting execution have been exonerated. Mistakes are far more likely in cases involving poor defendants, who usually don’t have adequate legal counsel." He also pointed to the racial unfairness of the death penalty: "In Ohio, for example, more than half of the death-sentenced defendants since 1981 have been African-Americans, even though African-Americans make up less than 13 percent of the population. Eighteen African-Americans have been executed in Ohio under the 1981 law — 35 percent of the total." He concluded, "The evidence points to one verdict: Capital punishment should die in Ohio." Read the full op-ed below.

Pages