Texas Prisoner Receives Second Stay of Execution Over Religious Discrimination Issue

A fed­er­al dis­trict court has grant­ed a stay of exe­cu­tion to a Buddhist death-row pris­on­er in Texas over alle­ga­tions that the state is dis­crim­i­na­to­ri­ly deny­ing him access to reli­gious ser­vices that would be avail­able to Christian pris­on­ers on the day of their exe­cu­tion. On November 7, 2019, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas stayed the November 13 exe­cu­tion of Patrick Murphy (pic­tured), mark­ing the sec­ond time in 2019 that his exe­cu­tion has been stayed over alle­ga­tions that Texas’ poli­cies regard­ing reli­gious advi­sors are dis­crim­i­na­to­ry. The Texas attor­ney general’s office has appealed the order.

In March, the U.S. Supreme Court grant­ed a last-minute stay to Murphy based on alle­ga­tions that Texas allowed Muslim and Christian pris­on­ers to have a spir­i­tu­al advi­sor present in the exe­cu­tion cham­ber, but did not grant such access for pris­on­ers of oth­er faiths. The stay came less than two months after the Court was sharply crit­i­cized for revers­ing a stay of exe­cu­tion and per­mit­ting Alabama to exe­cute Domineque Ray, a Muslim death-row pris­on­er who had not been per­mit­ted to have an imam present in the exe­cu­tion cham­ber in cir­cum­stances in which a Christian chap­lain was pro­vid­ed to con­demned Christian pris­on­ers. At the time, Justice Brett Kavanaugh sug­gest­ed two ways Texas could afford all reli­gious equal treat­ment and avoid a reli­gious dis­crim­i­na­tion vio­la­tion: by per­mit­ting all con­demned pris­on­ers to have a reli­gious advis­er of their reli­gion present in the exe­cu­tion cham­ber or by exclud­ing reli­gious advis­ers from the exe­cu­tion cham­ber alto­geth­er and pro­vid­ing equal access to a reli­gious advis­er in wit­ness­ing the execution.

Texas respond­ed by exclud­ing reli­gious advis­ers from the exe­cu­tion cham­ber. However, Murphy alleged that the new pol­i­cy con­tin­ues to dis­crim­i­nate because the state allows Christian and Muslim chap­lains, who are employed by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, to remain with pris­on­ers until the moment the pris­on­er enters the exe­cu­tions cham­ber and requires oth­er spir­i­tu­al advi­sors to leave the pris­on­er two hours before execution. 

In the stay order, U.S. District Judge George C. Hanks Jr. wrote that the reli­gious dis­crim­i­na­tion con­cerns raised by Murphy about Texas’ pre-exe­cu­tion pro­ce­dures ​“are as com­pelling as those in [his] orig­i­nal com­plaint.” The state’s revised pol­i­cy ​“still favors some reli­gions over oth­ers because TDCJ-employed chap­lains, who are all Christian or Muslim, have greater access to the con­demned than non-TDCJ employ­ee spir­i­tu­al advi­sors,” Hanks wrote. ​“If Murphy were Christian, he would have the ben­e­fit of faith-spe­cif­ic spir­i­tu­al sup­port until he entered the exe­cu­tion cham­ber; as a Buddhist he is denied that ben­e­fit.” Hanks tem­porar­i­ly halt­ed Murphy’s exe­cu­tion, writ­ing that a stay would pro­vide the court ​“time to explore and resolve seri­ous fac­tu­al con­cerns about the bal­ance between Murphy’s reli­gious rights and the prison’s valid con­cerns for security.” 

Texas’ Office of Attorney General filed a motion to vacate the stay in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on November 8, 2019. Murphy filed his response on Sunday, November 9, sup­port­ed by an ami­cus brief by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. As of pub­li­ca­tion, the cir­cuit court had not ruled on the state prosecutor’s motion. 

Murphy sought clemen­cy in March 2019 on the grounds that he did not par­tic­i­pate in the killing for which he was sen­tenced to death. Murphy was part of the ​“Texas Seven,” a group of prison escapees who robbed a sport­ing goods store. Murphy told the group’s leader, George Rivas, that he did not want to par­tic­i­pate in the rob­bery, then wait­ed out­side the store in a truck, act­ing as a look­out. He radioed the oth­ers when he saw police approach­ing, then left the park­ing lot. After he left, his co-defen­dants shot and killed Officer Aubrey Hawkins. Under Texas’ ​“Law of Parties,” Murphy was eli­gi­ble for the death penal­ty because he was involved in the rob­bery, even though he nei­ther killed nor intend­ed to kill Officer Hawkins.