California has suspended the death penalty and open questions about its validity in the United States

In recent days, California has joined the long list of twenty states that reject the death penalty with a "moratorium", which has so far been the subject of criticism and celebrations throughout the United States. The decision, however, also raises questions about what might happen to these sentences at the national level.

Governor Gavin Newsom had to defend his decision before a wave of criticism with the argument of the "disproportionality" to which, in his opinion, executions in the United States are, where the Supreme Court of Justice declared it constitutional in 1976.

At a news conference, Newsom noted that the 737 currently sentenced to death in that state represented "the largest number of people in the Western Hemisphere" and a quarter of the total, that the sentences disproportionately affect people of color, African-Americans and Hispanics. "

In addition, the governor cited a study by the National Academy of Sciences, published in 2014, which estimated that 4% of those sentenced to death in the country are probably innocent. Applying this percentage to Californian detainees, he added, about 30 people would be innocent or in the corridor. "inappropriately" and whose executions do not want to be responsible.

He also mentioned the case of Vicente Benavides Figueroa, a farm worker who has pbaded 26 years in prison and last April he was exonerated from the execution to which he was sentencedafter being found innocent during the re-examination of his file. "No one will be released, we do not claim the atrocious nature of these crimes committed, we do not celebrate these acts," he said.

He claimed that the application of the death penalty is badessed or has been abolished in different countries and that this approach is consistent with the "values ​​of California" and refers to the time it would take to execute all these sentences. "If a person is executed every day, we will see daily executions for two years," he said.

In California, where the death penalty has not been applied since 2006, they believe that Keeping the 737 sentenced to death costs about $ 150 million more than they were sentenced to life imprisonment.

Voices against the decision

Opponents of the announcement said that the measure contradicts the will of the voters of California, in 2012 and 2016, they rejected with their vote initiatives aimed at prohibit the death penalty in this state of the west of the country.

Also in 2016, the majority of voters supported an initiative that included shorten the appeal procedure to which an inmate is entitled for the purpose of speeding up the executions.

In the same way, organizations that support the victims of crime committed by those who were sentenced to death in the Golden State protested against the decision of the governor.

Twenty of the fifty states of the Union have abolished the death penalty, which is still in force for the other thirty, as well as for the federal government and the armed forces.

Movements against the death penalty throughout the country

According to an article of the site The conversation, the social approval of the death penalty is in progress its lowest level since the 1960s.

With the moratorium, indeed, California joins a growing list of states that have dropped these sentences. There are twenty – Eight recently, those who have already abolished the death penalty and four of them have suspended executions under a moratorium.

In addition to this wave of abolitionism, the death penalty is being used less and less in the states that maintain it, because pharmaceutical companies refuse to provide their drugs for executions.

Attempts to challenge the legality of the death penalty are based on the eighth amendment, which prohibits the death penalty. cruel and unusual punishment. These, the Supreme Court ruled in 1958, evolve over time as our standards of decency evolve.

The Supreme Court has also shown some hesitation in the past on the death penalty legislation. In 2007, he ruled that this practice was unconstitutional for most non-homicide crimes, and judges Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently ruled that the constitutionality of the death penalty should be reconsidered. In examining "evolving standards of decency," the Supreme Court badyzes state policies. It is in this sense that the announcement of Newsom can be of great importance.

In addition, California has always been a pioneer in the field of criminal justice because of the size of its prison population. Any policy change that increases (or decreases) incarceration in this country can have dramatic effects across the country.

Finally, California is also unique in its political makeup. The contrast between its very progressive (and democratic) coast and its deeply conservative center means that there are great differences in politics from one country to another. and surprising support for punitive policies in a largely liberal state.

Possible questions and scenarios

The first question that arises now is whether the more conservative composition of the new Supreme Court could block a general trend the abolition of the death penalty in the United States. The judge Anthony Kennedy, one of the biggest skeptics of the death penalty, has retired, while the president Neil Gorsuch seems to support this idea, and there are still discussions on the position that the controversial will adopt Brett Kavanaugh.

In the future, statistics and studies on the homicide rate will also be essential to deny what has been indefatigably maintained, but with little evidence, over the years. the possibility that the death penalty deters crime.