ABA Home
 
Death Penalty

Death Penalty Moratorium Could Be Wishful Thinking

Posted Oct 19, 2007, 12:23 pm CST
By Debra Cassens Weiss

Assertions that the nation’s courts have placed a moratorium on the death penalty may be premature.

The U.S. Supreme Court accepted a case last month challenging Kentucky’s use of lethal injection. Since then it has granted two stays of execution and refused to vacate a third. Several state courts have also granted stays.

Some death penalty opponents interpret the developments as a de facto moratorium, the New York Times reports. But Justice Antonin Scalia doesn’t see it that way. On Tuesday he dissented from the court’s refusal to vacate a stay in an Arkansas case brought by an inmate who raised the lethal injection issue nine years after his conviction became final. Scalia complained that the appeals court that granted the stay appeared to be operating on a “mistaken premise” that it was required.

Death penalty expert Elisabeth Semel also is reluctant to pronounce a de facto ban on executions.

“It would be inaccurate and very presumptuous to call this a moratorium,” she told the Times. “What we’re seeing is a combination of different courts, and different executives, deciding to be prudent” while waiting for the Supreme Court to rule.



Add Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.


Most Read



Subscribe

Get the ABA Journal the way you want it — in print, online, by e-mail — and when you want it — monthly, weekly, daily or as news breaks.



Subscribe via RSS
Subscribe to the mobile edition
Subscribe to the monthly magazine


Return to top