12:01: The Death Penalty in Context — The Death Penalty in 2024

In this month’s episode of 12:01: The Death Penalty in Context, Managing Director Anne Holsinger speaks with DPI Communications Associate Hayley Bedard, about The Death Penalty in 2024, which high­lights trends and events relat­ed to the death penal­ty. 2024 marked the tenth con­sec­u­tive year dur­ing which few­er than 30 peo­ple were exe­cut­ed (25) and few­er than 50 peo­ple were sen­tenced to death (26), while high pro­file cas­es of death-sen­tenced peo­ple attract­ed sig­nif­i­cant media atten­tion and new, unex­pect­ed sup­port­ers. Per the report’s find­ings, just four states (Alabama, Texas, Missouri, and Oklahoma) were respon­si­ble for more than three-quar­ters (76%) of exe­cu­tions in 2024.

Executions reflect the views of jurors at the time of sen­tenc­ing — increas­ing­ly, views that are 20 or 30 years out of date. ​“The aver­age time from sen­tenc­ing to exe­cu­tion was about 22 years, and so the peo­ple who were exe­cut­ed this year real­ly are reflect­ing the laws and norms that were in place 22 years ago, and there have been sig­nif­i­cant changes in rep­re­sen­ta­tion and the qual­i­ty of attor­neys that are offered to peo­ple fac­ing death sen­tences,” said Ms. Holsinger. Legislative and legal changes, increased scruti­ny of pros­e­cu­to­r­i­al prac­tices, and shifts in soci­etal atti­tudes over recent decades have also sig­nif­i­cant­ly affect­ed whether defen­dants receive death sentences.

The 26 new death sen­tences in 2024 were scat­tered among ten states, but two states – both of which are the only states to still per­mit non-unan­i­mous sen­tenc­ing — were respon­si­ble for 42% of new death sen­tences: Florida (7) and Alabama (4). Nine of these eleven death sen­tences were non-unan­i­mous. Public sup­port for the death penal­ty remains at a five-decade low accord­ing to a late 2024 Gallup poll, with just 53% of Americans say­ing that they sup­port the death penal­ty. Millennials and mem­bers of Generation Z (so peo­ple between 18 and 43) are much less like­ly to sup­port the death penal­ty than mem­bers of Generation X, Baby Boomers, and the Silent Generation.

2024 saw local politi­cians wield­ing deci­sive influ­ence over death penal­ty out­comes across mul­ti­ple states. The case of Marcellus Williams in Missouri sparked dis­agree­ment between local and state lead­ers, even as more than 1.5 mil­lion cit­i­zens voiced their oppo­si­tion to his exe­cu­tion. A shift emerged in Texas and Oklahoma, where elect­ed offi­cials tra­di­tion­al­ly in sup­port of the death penal­ty raised con­cern over its impact on inno­cent peo­ple. They drew atten­tion to cas­es like those of Robert Roberson and Richard Glossip, where state laws and pro­ce­dures failed to pro­tect pris­on­ers who pre­sent­ed sub­stan­tial evi­dence of their innocence.

In 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s hands-off approach con­tin­ued. The Court declined to review near­ly every death penal­ty posi­tion it received, reject­ing 145 out of 148 cas­es. ​“It has been much more dif­fi­cult for [pris­on­ers] to obtain relief in inno­cence cas­es and non-inno­cence cas­es, this affects peo­ple with due process claims and oth­er con­sti­tu­tion­al chal­lenges…,” said Ms. Bedard. This reflects the Court’s retreat from the crit­i­cal role it has his­tor­i­cal­ly played in reg­u­lat­ing and lim­it­ing the use of the death penalty.

Over the last sev­er­al months, the Death Penalty Information Center has refreshed our web­site and logo, and we’re also shift­ing from using the short­ened name DPIC to the acronym DPI. Our new pod­cast name shares an inspi­ra­tion with our new logo. Both refer to the tra­di­tion­al time when exe­cu­tions were held — just after mid­night in complete secrecy.