Articles

The edi­to­r­i­al boards of Oklahoma​’s two major news­pa­pers and the lead­er­ship of the Oklahoma Conference of Churches are all urg­ing vot­ers to vote no on State Question 776, which would enshrine the death penal­ty in the Oklahoma con­sti­tu­tion and remove from state courts the pow­er to declare the death penal­ty cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment. The Oklahoman called SQ 776​“unnece­sary,” say­ing it,​“should be reject­ed by Oklahoma vot­ers on Nov. 8.” The…

Newspaper edi­to­r­i­al boards in California are over­whelm­ing­ly sup­port­ing a November bal­lot ini­tia­tive to abol­ish the state’s death penal­ty and replace it with life with­out parole plus resti­tu­tion, and are uni­form­ly reject­ing an oppos­ing ini­tia­tive that pur­ports to speed up the appeals process. At least eight California news­pa­pers have pub­lished edi­to­ri­als sup­port­ing Proposition 62 and oppos­ing Proposition 66, and Ballotpedia reports that it is…

Weighing in on California’s com­pet­ing death penal­ty bal­lot ini­tia­tives, the San Jose Mercury News edi­to­r­i­al board urged vot­ers to sup­port repeal of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment and reject a pro­pos­al to speed up exe­cu­tions. The edi­to­r­i­al called California’s death penal­ty sys­tem,​“a fail­ure on every lev­el,” not­ing that the state has spent $4 bil­lion to car­ry out just 13 exe­cu­tions and the $150 mil­lion annu­al sav­ings the independent…

The Lexington Herald-Leader, Kentucky’s sec­ond-largest news­pa­per, announced it was end­ing its long-held sup­port for the death penal­ty, and now believes the state leg­is­la­ture should abol­ish cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment. Describing its pre­vi­ous posi­tion as​“keep it but fix it,” the edi­tors stat­ed,​“we must now con­cede that the death penal­ty is not going to be fixed and, in fact, prob­a­bly can­not be fixed at any defen­si­ble cost to tax­pay­ers.” Citing the 2011 American…

Several news­pa­pers across the coun­try fea­tured themes from DPIC’s 2015 Year End Report in edi­to­ri­als and opin­ion pieces at the…

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit will hear argu­ments on September 23 regard­ing Scott Panetti​’s com­pe­ten­cy to be exe­cut­ed. Panetti is a severe­ly men­tal­ly ill man who rep­re­sent­ed him­self at his tri­al wear­ing a cow­boy cos­tume, and attempt­ed to sub­poe­na the Pope, John F. Kennedy, and Jesus Christ. As the court pre­pares to hear Panetti’s case, opin­ion pieces in two Texas news­pa­pers used it to illus­trate larger problems…

On August 6, North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory signed a law that removed the require­ment that a physi­cian be present at exe­cu­tions and shroud­ed in secre­cy many ele­ments of the lethal injec­tion process, includ­ing the spe­cif­ic drugs to be used and the sup­pli­ers of those drugs. By elim­i­nat­ing the physi­­cian-par­tic­i­­pa­­tion require­ment, the law attempt­ed to remove a legal hur­dle that has halt­ed exe­cu­tions in North Carolina since 2006. Two major state…

Recent edi­to­ri­als from lead­ing news­pa­pers in three of the largest death row states cri­tique flaws in the death penal­ty and call for its abo­li­tion. The Sacramento Bee quot­ed fed­er­al dis­trict court judge Cormac Carney’s recent rul­ing find­ing California’s death penal­ty uncon­sti­tu­tion­al because exe­cu­tions are so rare that they​“serve no ret­ribu­tive or deter­rent pur­pose.” The Bee called the state’s capital…

On May 12, the edi­to­r­i­al board of USA Today affirmed its oppo­si­tion to the death penal­ty in an edi­to­r­i­al urg­ing that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev be sen­tenced to life with­out parole, rather than the death penal­ty, for his role in the Boston marathon bomb­ing.​“Laws aren’t writ­ten for a sin­gle indi­vid­ual, and the death penal­ty applies to many peo­ple,” the edi­to­r­i­al said.​“Tsarnaev and oth­er infa­mous defen­dants … demon­strate the penal­ty’s arbi­trary nature. While…

A recent edi­to­r­i­al in The News & Observer (Raleigh, NC) has crit­i­cized leg­isla­tive efforts to restart North Carolina’s death penal­ty as​“ret­ro­gres­sive” and​“macabre.” The edi­to­r­i­al oppos­es a bill that would allow exe­cu­tions to resume in North Carolina by​“expand­ing the list of med­ical per­son­nel who can mon­i­tor exe­cu­tions.” In 2007, the North Carolina Medical Board said that doc­tor par­tic­i­pa­tion in executions violates…