Then they can vote him out in the next election if killing prisoners is so important to them. I somehow doubt it’s that important, but I could be wrong.
In any case, criminal justice isn’t always about doing what’s popular, but about what’s right. And sometimes it’s necessary for the leader of a state to show leadership on an issue and change the paradigm.
There’s no evidence that capital punishment makes us a better, safer, or more law-abiding society; it just makes us feel better about what happens to the perpetrators of murder once they’re caught. Most of the time, they’ve served lengthy sentences behind bars by the time they’re executed, and a majority of death row inmates are probably never executed anyway.
Even if I agreed with your statement (which I don’t) how do you know you have one of those ‘certain individuals’?
Do you want to take a guess at how many death row inmates have been exonerated (that we know about)?
If you still think the death penalty is appropriate even knowing that the state will be killing some innocent people with almost 100% certainty, it means you’re not interested in justice. You simply want retribution. And that’s now how the justice system is supposed to work in civilized society.
How is this legal? The governor has the power to unilaterally overrule the legislature and the referendum outcomes? Is it okay for the governor to just decide not to do his job? He should have to commute the sentences one by one and not just start acting like the Sun King.
I know a lot of people have valid issues with Newsom as a politician, but between this and his stance on gay marriage when he was mayor, he’s got my vote for pretty much any political office he cares to run for.
But I’m not totally clear if he has issued commutations to all of those on death row, as opposed to establishing a policy that there will be no executions in California. The way the press is reporting it, it seems like the latter.
Basically, the moratorium is a reprieve for everyone on death row, and basically signal that anyone else sentenced to death is going to be reprieved, so don’t bother. It’s not actually changing a law (and I doubt there’s any law that requires the death penalty). Similar to what happened in Illinois. Ryan issued a moratorium by commuting all current sentences. Then ten years latter they actually passed a law banning the death penalty. In that time a dozen more people were sentenced to death, but no one was executed.
Aside from the moral issue, getting rid of the DP is just sensible. An initiative to “speed up” the DP is meaningless–there are mandatory appeals and an entire process that must be followed to the letter before a prisoner can be executed and even if the prisoner is sick of the process and begs for the needle it can’t be granted until every “i” has been dotted and every “t” crossed. This means that any DP sentence that is carried out is going to be miles more expensive in taxpayer dollars than the very longest life sentence w/o parole could possibly be, and also shields the state from challenges of wrongful death from the family should a mistake be made and an innocent person get the axe. Newsom is on the side of sense, good for him.
He never said that he would abide by the will of the voters. He said that he would be accountable to them. And he is. If they are sufficiently offended by his actions, then they can vote him out at the next election, or even recall him early. And the fact that he’s doing this anyway, despite the awareness that it could cost him his job, makes his actions even more praiseworthy.
The Governor has the power to stay an execution, correct? Likewise, if someone is executed it is the Governor’s responsibility as well?
Since the Governor is responsible for death row inmates if they are executed or not, seems like Newsom went with his conscience. I applaud this decision and action.
This is NOT the same as other decisions where the Governor does NOT have power over individuals.
I was going to say, I’m no fan of Gavin Newsom, but taking a moral stance even when it conflicts with the law is a key element of his political persona and something that California voters were well aware of when they chose him to be governor. I’m a supporter of the death penalty in theory, but his order makes a good case, particularly the fact that we’ve spent $5 billion to execute only 13 people since 1978.
I also vaguely remember something about there having to be a licensed doctor present at executions to make sure it’s “humane,” but some licensing board said that it would immediately revoke the license of anybody who agreed to take such a position, making it impossible to carry out the execution legally.
Right, basically he lied. Which is what I expected. I am not happy with the DP, especially the way it is done in say, Texas, too much chance of a innocent man being executed. (and in fact in texas, there is a very good chance that this guy was executed for setting a fire that killed his family, when in fact that fire was accidental).