Has the death penal­ty evolved into an anachro­nism?” asked a pan­el at the August 2, 2018 American Bar Association Annual Meeting in Chicago. Moderator Ronald Tabak, chair of the ABA Death Penalty Committee, and pan­elists Cardinal Blase J. Cupich of the Archdiocese of Chicago; Karen Gottlieb, co-direc­tor of the Florida Center for Capital Representation; Meredith Martin Rountree, senior lec­tur­er at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law; and Robert Dunham, exec­u­tive direc­tor of the Death Penalty Information Center sought to answer that ques­tion through a dis­cus­sion of the last forty years of American death-penal­ty his­to­ry and the evo­lu­tion of the Catholic Church’s moral teach­ings on the sub­ject. The pan­elists’ con­sen­sus: the death sen­tences imposed upon many of the death-row pris­on­ers exe­cut­ed in the past would be uncon­sti­tu­tion­al today, and most of the pris­on­ers now being exe­cut­ed would not be sen­tenced to death if they were tried today. 

The pan­el serendip­i­tous­ly took place on the same day that Pope Francis announced that the Catholic Church had for­mal­ly revised its Catechism to deem the death penal­ty inad­mis­si­ble.” Cardinal Cupich described the evo­lu­tion of the Catholic Church’s teach­ings on cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, with an emerg­ing focus on the con­cept of the dig­ni­ty of human life. Our asser­tion that the val­ue of a human life does not depend upon an individual’s qual­i­ty of life or age or moral worth must apply in all cas­es,” he said. For if we pro­tect the sanc­ti­ty of life for the least wor­thy among us, we sure­ly wit­ness to the need to pro­tect the lives of those who are the most inno­cent, and most vul­ner­a­ble.” Karen Gottlieb high­light­ed how acci­dents of tim­ing can result in uncon­sti­tu­tion­al exe­cu­tions, using Florida as an exam­ple of how numer­ous defen­dants with valid con­sti­tu­tion­al claims have been exe­cut­ed before courts issue rul­ings that would have barred their exe­cu­tion and how recent court rul­ings will per­mit the exe­cu­tion of more than 150 death-row pris­on­ers who the state court acknowl­edges were sen­tenced under uncon­sti­tu­tion­al pro­ce­dures. Meredith Martin Rountree dis­cussed how American death-penal­ty law has evolved to exempt youth­ful offend­ers and indi­vid­u­als with intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty and pro­vid­ed exam­ples of cur­rent death-penal­ty prac­tices — includ­ing the exe­cu­tion of offend­ers aged 18 – 21 and of peo­ple with severe men­tal ill­ness — that could like­ly be banned in the future. Robert Dunham explained the sea change in America’s atti­tudes about cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment” over the past twen­ty-five years and the rea­sons behind the accom­pa­ny­ing broad nation­wide decline in death-penal­ty usage over that peri­od. He pro­vid­ed exam­ples of more than 250 peo­ple who have been exe­cut­ed despite con­sti­tu­tion­al vio­la­tions that would have inval­i­dat­ed their death sen­tences today and the esti­mat­ed hun­dreds of oth­ers who were uncon­sti­tu­tion­al­ly sen­tenced to death but exe­cut­ed nev­er­the­less because of pro­ce­dur­al tech­ni­cal­i­ties that pre­vent­ed fed­er­al courts from enforc­ing con­sti­tu­tion­al pro­tec­tions in those cases.

A tran­script of the pro­ceed­ings, with updates from the pan­elists, was released by the ABA’s Section of Civil Rights and Social Justice in late September 2018 and post­ed on the DPIC website.

(Transcript, 2018 ABA Annual Meeting, Has The Death Penalty Evolved Into An Anachronism?, American Bar Association, August 22018.) 

Citation Guide