(Photo: Scott Lenger / Flickr Creative Commons)
Jul 16, 2014
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that California's death penalty system violates the U.S. prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" because rampant delays in appeals decisions coupled with sporadic executions create an "arbitrary" and unfair system of justice.
The ruling is a response to a challenge by Ernest Jones, who has been on Death Row in California for nearly two decades, and commutes his death sentence to life in prison without parole.
Orange County U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney--a George W. Bush appointee--wrote Wednesday that the state's "penalty system is so plagued by inordinate and unpredictable delay that the death sentence is actually carried out against only a trivial few of those sentenced to death." Carney continues, "For all practical purposes then, a sentence of death in California is a sentence of life imprisonment with the remote possibility of death -- a sentence no rational legislature or jury could ever impose."
The small number of people who have been executed were forced to remain on Death Row for so long their killing was "arbitrary" and "random," argues Carney.
No one has been executed in California since 2006, following a ruling by another federal judge that California's lethal injection processes put people at high risk of an agonizing execution. Yet 748 people in the state remain on Death Row, at a significant cost to taxpayers.
Natasha Minsker, director of the ACLU of Northern California, told the Los Angeles Times that Wednesday's decision marks the "first time any judge has ruled systemic delay creates an arbitrary system that serves no legitimate purpose and is therefore unconstitutional."
The ruling can be challenged in the 9th circuit court of appeals.
_____________________
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare was a staff writer for Common Dreams from 2013-2016. She is currently web editor and reporter for In These Times.
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that California's death penalty system violates the U.S. prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" because rampant delays in appeals decisions coupled with sporadic executions create an "arbitrary" and unfair system of justice.
The ruling is a response to a challenge by Ernest Jones, who has been on Death Row in California for nearly two decades, and commutes his death sentence to life in prison without parole.
Orange County U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney--a George W. Bush appointee--wrote Wednesday that the state's "penalty system is so plagued by inordinate and unpredictable delay that the death sentence is actually carried out against only a trivial few of those sentenced to death." Carney continues, "For all practical purposes then, a sentence of death in California is a sentence of life imprisonment with the remote possibility of death -- a sentence no rational legislature or jury could ever impose."
The small number of people who have been executed were forced to remain on Death Row for so long their killing was "arbitrary" and "random," argues Carney.
No one has been executed in California since 2006, following a ruling by another federal judge that California's lethal injection processes put people at high risk of an agonizing execution. Yet 748 people in the state remain on Death Row, at a significant cost to taxpayers.
Natasha Minsker, director of the ACLU of Northern California, told the Los Angeles Times that Wednesday's decision marks the "first time any judge has ruled systemic delay creates an arbitrary system that serves no legitimate purpose and is therefore unconstitutional."
The ruling can be challenged in the 9th circuit court of appeals.
_____________________
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare was a staff writer for Common Dreams from 2013-2016. She is currently web editor and reporter for In These Times.
A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that California's death penalty system violates the U.S. prohibition against "cruel and unusual punishment" because rampant delays in appeals decisions coupled with sporadic executions create an "arbitrary" and unfair system of justice.
The ruling is a response to a challenge by Ernest Jones, who has been on Death Row in California for nearly two decades, and commutes his death sentence to life in prison without parole.
Orange County U.S. District Court Judge Cormac J. Carney--a George W. Bush appointee--wrote Wednesday that the state's "penalty system is so plagued by inordinate and unpredictable delay that the death sentence is actually carried out against only a trivial few of those sentenced to death." Carney continues, "For all practical purposes then, a sentence of death in California is a sentence of life imprisonment with the remote possibility of death -- a sentence no rational legislature or jury could ever impose."
The small number of people who have been executed were forced to remain on Death Row for so long their killing was "arbitrary" and "random," argues Carney.
No one has been executed in California since 2006, following a ruling by another federal judge that California's lethal injection processes put people at high risk of an agonizing execution. Yet 748 people in the state remain on Death Row, at a significant cost to taxpayers.
Natasha Minsker, director of the ACLU of Northern California, told the Los Angeles Times that Wednesday's decision marks the "first time any judge has ruled systemic delay creates an arbitrary system that serves no legitimate purpose and is therefore unconstitutional."
The ruling can be challenged in the 9th circuit court of appeals.
_____________________
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.