John J. Donohue (pic­tured), a research asso­ciate for the National Bureau of Economic Research and a pro­fes­sor at Stanford Law School, recent­ly high­light­ed con­tin­u­ing prob­lems with the death penal­ty sys­tem, forty years after it was struck down for being applied in an arbi­trary man­ner. Professor Donohue wrote that despite new and improved” statutes accept­ed by the Court when it rein­stat­ed the death penal­ty in 1976, four decades lat­er, there is plen­ty of evi­dence that the death penal­ty con­tin­ues to be applied in an unfair man­ner and not a shred of evi­dence that the death penal­ty deters.” Professor Donohue cit­ed a recent find­ing by the National Research Council, which exam­ined all deter­rence stud­ies over the past 35 years and con­clud­ed that the stud­ies are not infor­ma­tive about whether cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment decreas­es, increas­es, or has no effect on homi­cide rates” and should not influ­ence pol­i­cy judg­ments about cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment.” Professor Donohue also encour­aged vot­ers in California to replace the death penal­ty in November’s bal­lot. He said, “[D]espite the sup­posed improve­ments endorsed in 1976, the death penal­ty remains hope­less­ly bro­ken… We have the chance to pre­vent inno­cent peo­ple from being exe­cut­ed, end the unfair­ness that per­vades the cur­rent sys­tem, and save mil­lions in tax rev­enues, all while improv­ing public safety.”

(J. Donohue, Time to Kill the Death Penalty?,” California Progress Report, June 28, 2012). See Arbitrariness and Deterrence. Listen to our pod­cast on Deterrence.

Citation Guide