SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Connecticut Abolishes Death Penalty, Bans Further Executions
State's Supreme Court ruled that death penalty 'no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency'
Aug 13, 2015
Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the state's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the planned executions of 11 men on death row, thereby abolishing all capital punishment in the state.
The 4-3 decision came three years after the state passed a law that repealed the death penalty but did not spare those already sentenced to die.
"Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing constitutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.
"For these reasons, execution of those offenders who committed capital felonies before April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," he continued.
The court's decision came in response to an appeal by Eduardo Santiago, a man on death row in Connecticut. While public defenders represented him, the ACLU and its Connecticut chapter filed separate amicus briefs to support his case.
Dan Barrett, the legal director of the Connecticut ACLU, told Common Dreams, "We are overjoyed at the ruling because it once and for all declares that killing prisoners is not a part of justice in Connecticut."
The court concluded that the death penalty violates the state's constitution because of: "the freakishness with which the sentence of death is imposed; the rarity with which it is carried out; and the racial, ethnic, and socio-economic biases that likely are inherent in any discretionary death penalty system."
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
aclucapital punishmentconnecticutdeath penaltydeath rowexecutionshuman rightsjusticeprisonssupreme court
Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the state's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the planned executions of 11 men on death row, thereby abolishing all capital punishment in the state.
The 4-3 decision came three years after the state passed a law that repealed the death penalty but did not spare those already sentenced to die.
"Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing constitutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.
"For these reasons, execution of those offenders who committed capital felonies before April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," he continued.
The court's decision came in response to an appeal by Eduardo Santiago, a man on death row in Connecticut. While public defenders represented him, the ACLU and its Connecticut chapter filed separate amicus briefs to support his case.
Dan Barrett, the legal director of the Connecticut ACLU, told Common Dreams, "We are overjoyed at the ruling because it once and for all declares that killing prisoners is not a part of justice in Connecticut."
The court concluded that the death penalty violates the state's constitution because of: "the freakishness with which the sentence of death is imposed; the rarity with which it is carried out; and the racial, ethnic, and socio-economic biases that likely are inherent in any discretionary death penalty system."
Sarah Lazare
Sarah Lazare is the editor of Workday Magazine and a contributing editor for In These Times. She is a former Staff Writer at Common Dreams. She comes from a background in independent journalism for publications including The Intercept, The Nation, and Tom Dispatch.
Connecticut's Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the state's ban on cruel and unusual punishment prohibits the planned executions of 11 men on death row, thereby abolishing all capital punishment in the state.
The 4-3 decision came three years after the state passed a law that repealed the death penalty but did not spare those already sentenced to die.
"Upon careful consideration of the defendant's claims in light of the governing constitutional principles and Connecticut's unique historical and legal landscape, we are persuaded that, following its prospective abolition, this state's death penalty no longer comports with contemporary standards of decency and no longer serves any legitimate penological purpose," Justice Richard Palmer wrote for the majority.
"For these reasons, execution of those offenders who committed capital felonies before April 25, 2012, would violate the state constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment," he continued.
The court's decision came in response to an appeal by Eduardo Santiago, a man on death row in Connecticut. While public defenders represented him, the ACLU and its Connecticut chapter filed separate amicus briefs to support his case.
Dan Barrett, the legal director of the Connecticut ACLU, told Common Dreams, "We are overjoyed at the ruling because it once and for all declares that killing prisoners is not a part of justice in Connecticut."
The court concluded that the death penalty violates the state's constitution because of: "the freakishness with which the sentence of death is imposed; the rarity with which it is carried out; and the racial, ethnic, and socio-economic biases that likely are inherent in any discretionary death penalty system."
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.