VADP

April 16, 2008 – The U.S. Supreme Court decision upholding Kentucky’s lethal injection protocol sidesteps the critical issues surrounding the death penalty debate in the U.S., the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty said today. 

“The death penalty system was a flawed public policy before the Supreme Court agreed to review Kentucky’s lethal injection protocol,” said NCADP Executive Director Diann Rust-Tierney. “It was a flawed public policy while the Court debated the protocol. And now that the Court has ruled, it remains as deeply a flawed public policy as ever.” 

The relatively narrow scope of the Court’s deliberations did not address basic issues of fairness, bias, ineffective assistance of counsel or innocent people being convicted and sentenced to death, Rust-Tierney said. She noted that the U.S. has gone almost seven months since an execution – the longest period of time without an execution since a 17-month hiatus that stretched from early 1981 into late 1982.
 
“Now, with the possible resumption of executions, we renew our commitment to discuss the critical issues surrounding the death penalty system,” Rust-Tierney said. “Since the last person was executed – on Sept. 24, 2007 – we have seen a number of remarkable events. Four names have been added to the list of people freed from death row after evidence of their innocence emerged, bringing that number to at least 128. New Jersey has abolished the death penalty. Nebraska has no effective death penalty after its Supreme Court ruled the electric chair unconstitutional. The American Bar Association has called for a nationwide moratorium on executions. And the United Nations, reflecting evolving trends around the globe, has voted for a worldwide moratorium.”

In addition, Rust-Tierney said, California and Tennessee have held state hearings in order to study their respective death penalty systems. Constitutional questions have been raised in New Hampshire and New Mexico and wrongful conviction and DNA lab scandals continue in Texas.

“And that’s just in seven months,” Rust-Tierney noted. “It seems that the more we learn about the death penalty, the more we learn we can live without it.”

Indeed, Rust-Tierney noted Justice Stevens’ concurrence in today’s opinion in which he warned that debate will continue – not just over lethal injection protocols “but also about the justification for the death penalty itself.”