ABC News is reporting more on what we noticed already about yesterday’s supreme court ruling on lethal injection, which is that Justice Stevens gave notice in his dissent that he in favor of abolishing the death penalty, making him the newest, and currently only abolitionist Justice on the Supreme Court.
Justice John Paul Stevens, the Supreme Court’s most senior member, took aim at the entire system of capital punishment Wednesday, writing in an opinion that it was a “pointless and needless extinction of life with only marginal contributions to any discernible social or public purposes.”
Stevens’ stance came to light in his opinion on Kentucky’s lethal injection protocol, which the court, including Stevens, upheld Wednesday in a 7-2 decision. There had been an unofficial moratorium on executions while the court mulled the case.
It is the first time 87-year-old Stevens has called on states to stop executions entirely.
Stevens wrote, “the risk of executing innocent defendants can be entirely eliminated by treating any penalty more severe than life imprisonment without the possibility of parole as constitutionally excessive.”
In essence, Stevens has sent a signal that, while he recognizes the court has, in the past, found the death penalty to be constitutional, he thinks it’s now time for state legislatures, Congress and the courts to reconsider.
He wrote how current attempts to “retain the death penalty as part of our law” are the “product of habit and inattention, rather than an acceptable deliberative process” that weighs the costs of administering the penalty against its benefits.
In 1976, only months after he had been nominated to the high court by President Gerald Ford, Stevens voted to reauthorize the death penalty in Gregg v. Georgia. Four years earlier, the court had invalidated it.
In speeches, Stevens has hinted that he found problems with the way the death penalty was administered, but Wednesday marked the first time he has used an opinion to clarify his position.
In an August 2005 speech before the American Bar Association, Stevens cited reports that death sentences had been imposed erroneously. “That evidence is profoundly significant,” he said, “not only because of its relevance to the debate about the wisdom of continuing to administer capital punishment, but also because it indicates that there must be serious flaws in our administration of criminal justice.”
Stevens joins only three other justices in history William J. Brennan, Thurgood Marshall and Harry Blackmun who voiced their opposition to the death penalty.
