On October 11th The
Washington State Supreme Court unanimously abolished
the death penalty. The death penalty was rare in Washington, but now it has
been completely struck down. Prisoners that were currently on death row have now
been given a new verdict of life in prison instead of the costly death that
would await them. The picture shows gov Jay Inslee, addressing a news
conference following the announcement of the Washington Supreme Court regarding
the death penilty.
In the past fifteen
years seven states have abandoned the capital punishment, while other states
such as Texas have executed 108 imprisoned people since 2010. People against
the death penalty, such as Chief Justice Mary Fairhurst, believe that "Our capital punishment law lacks 'fundamental
fairness.'" There are too many faults with the death penalty such as its
irreversibleness (nothing can be done if the defendant is later proven guilty),
its cost, and its racial bias. In fact, a statistical analysis from the
University of Washington, stated that "their report showed that although
prosecutors were not more likely to seek the execution of black defendants,
juries were about four times more likely to sentence black defendants to
death." This makes administering the death penalty, unfair because someone
should not be more likely to be administered it simply because of bias on their skin color.
There
has been a profound shift on our country’s opinion on the death penalty. We
hope to see other states challenge the death penalty based on the reasoning of
Washington's Supreme Court. This has connected with what we have been studying
on the topic of federal vs. state rights. Although something, such as the death
penilty may be legal federally, many states may chose not to have it be legal
in their territories. States have the power to change what they don't think is right.
- Why do you think some states refuse to abolish the death penilty?
- How could the death penilty be seen as racially biased?
1. Some states refuse the death penalty because it is irreversible, it is expensive, and it holds a racial bias towards non-whites.
ReplyDelete2. The death penalty could be seen as racially biased as statistics show that juries were 4 times more likely to sentence black defendants to execution than whites.
Sophia McMaster
ReplyDelete1. Some states refuse to abolish the death penalty because it deters crime rates. Studies show that the death penalty decreases the amount of murders and other high crimes. Some states also believe that these criminals deserve to be on "death row".
2. This can be racially biased because many statistics show that African Americans are more likely to be placed in "death row" than whites.
1. Some states refuse to abolish the death penalty because they believe it is what high crime criminals deserve and it is the best way to deter people from committing these crimes.
ReplyDelete2. The death penalty can be racially biased because African-Americans tend to receive harsher punishment for the same crimes and more likely to be sentenced to death.
1. Everyone has differing opinions on what crimes deserve what punishments. Some states see the death penalty as the kind of punishment that should be given to people who commit serious crimes, and is a significant punishment that deters people from committing the crimes. Different states also have different crime rates, so some states see it as necessary while others that have lower crime rates don't.
ReplyDelete2. The death penalty can be racially biased because it could target African Americans who are more likely to be placed on death row.
1. Some states refuse to abolish the death penalty because they believe that it is a proper way to deal with a criminal under certain circumstance. Other states however have considered it to be inhumane.
ReplyDelete2. The death penalty can be seen as racially bias because the countries criminal justice system often targets minority groups, specifically African Americans.
1. I think some states refuse to abolish the death penalty because they see it as a way to permanently keep criminals off the streets. Furthermore, it is also a way to alleviate the problem of overcrowded prisons. American prisons tend to be overrun with criminals (mostly due to long drug sentences), which is very expensive for state governments. State budgets are already tight, especially because the federal government tends to force costly mandates upon state governments. Thus, the death penalty is a way for states to save money.
ReplyDelete2. The death penalty could be seen as racially biased because mostly non-white people are given the death penalty. This has been a problem for years, but the Supreme Court ruled that it was constitutional in McCleskey v. Kemp.
1. Many states refuse to abolish the death penalty because it allows it to remain an option. A state does not have to enforce the death penalty by any means and can choose how that is determined, but having it an option is better than being stuck in a situation where you have to hold inmates for the rest of their lives for the most severe of crimes.
ReplyDelete2. It depends on how it is implemented on the people. It can be easily recognized as racially biased depending on the severity of the crimes compared among those sentence to death.
1) Some states refuse the abolishment of capital punishment because of their political ideologies. While it costs more money to execute a criminal with a lethal injection than life in prison, states choose not to abolish it as the state governor gets to decide with a phone connected to the penitentiary of who can get bailed out of that particular situation.
ReplyDelete2) Criminal justice system is disproportioned with more minorities, therefore safe to assume that latter applies to the death penalty.
1. Some states refuse to abolish the death penalty not just because of political parties or beliefs, but because they believe it is efficient and right. Given the degree of crime, it gives states the option of prison or the death penalty-- more than one way out.
ReplyDelete2. The death penalty could be racially biased if it was administered to more racial minorities such as african americans.
Jessica Masterson
ReplyDelete1. Some states refuse to abolish the death penalty because they believe that it is effective in decreasing the amount of crime (it scares people from committing them), and also think that it is the correct punishment to high crimes.
2. The death penalty could be seen as racially biased because as the article stated, “ juries were about four times more likely to sentence black defendants to death." Also, African Americans recieve harsher punishments for the same crimes committed by white people, showing racism in the justice system.
1. States don't abolish the death penalty because they think its important to have it as an option should someone commit high crime. It is however, pretty expensive to kill someone with lethal injection which could explain why a lot of people remain on death row and why some states don't want to do it.
ReplyDelete2. "their report showed that although prosecutors were not more likely to seek the execution of black defendants, juries were about four times more likely to sentence black defendants to death." So yeah.
1. Many see the death penalty as necessary in the most extreme cases, and as a good deterrent for the most horrible crimes.
ReplyDelete2. The penalty itself is not racially biased, but the criminal justice system is, making bias in such extreme and final choices as execution more impactful.