Miami Herald, Editorial

On the weighty ques­tion of whether an exe­cu­tion pass­es con­sti­tu­tion­al muster, both advo­cates and foes of the death penal­ty are in rare agree­ment: Let the courts decide.

Thus Gov. Jeb Bush halt­ed today’s sched­uled exe­cu­tion of Robert Trease short­ly after the U.S. Supreme Court stopped the exe­cu­tion of anoth­er Florida inmate, Linroy Bottoson.

Both the Supreme Court and the gov­er­nor made the right call. Gov. Bush, a strong sup­port­er of cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, said he made his deci­sion because Trease isn’t rep­re­sent­ed by a lawyer and because a Supreme Court rul­ing on the issue could affect oth­er Florida death row inmates.

Some may be tempt­ed to read into the gov­er­nor’s action more than was intend­ed. But his deci­sion sim­ply shows good judg­ment in the face of 2 Supreme Court sus­pen­sions of Florida exe­cu­tions. Last month, the Court delayed the exe­cu­tion of Amos Lee King while it con­sid­ers a con­sti­tu­tion­al chal­lenge to the pow­er of a judge, rather than a jury, to impose the death penalty.

Gov. Bush has­n’t changed his posi­tion on cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, nor is he like­ly to. If, how­ev­er, the Supreme Court decides that Florida’s death-penal­ty law is out of sync with the Constitution, then the gov­er­nor and Legislature would be oblig­at­ed to review the law and bring it into com­pli­ance — as they have pledged to do.

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear the case of an Arizona man who chal­lenges the death penal­ty as uncon­sti­tu­tion­al when imposed by a judge and not a jury. Also indica­tive of the Supreme Court’s inter­est in the death penal­ty was a speech last sum­mer in which Justice Sandra Day
O’Connor, who has sup­port­ed cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment, ques­tioned if the U.S. jus­tice sys­tem had allowed ​“some inno­cent defen­dants to be executed.”

Justice O’Connor’s con­cerns are well-found­ed. According to the Death Penalty Information Center, 99 peo­ple have been released or exon­er­at­ed from death sen­tences nation­wide since cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment was rein­stat­ed in 1973.

The Supreme Court’s inter­ven­tion can only ensure a fair­er sys­tem.
Return to U.S. Supreme Court: Ring v. Arizona