In a state where the death penalty has been a contentious issue for decades, efforts to repeal it have been gaining momentum in Pennsylvania. A movement that began as a grassroots campaign, fueled by the pleas of families who have lost loved ones to the brutal practice, has evolved into a robust and determined effort to bring an end to the use of the death penalty in the Keystone State. Here, we’ll explore the latest developments in the battle to repeal Pennsylvania’s death penalty, and examine the challenges that lie ahead in the fight to end this senseless and inhumane practice.
Repealing the Death Penalty in Pennsylvania: A Comprehensive Framework
Background and History of the Death Penalty Debate
Pennsylvania has a formal moratorium on executions since 2015 and has not executed anyone since 1999. The Pennsylvania House Judiciary Committee voted 15-10 in favor of HB 999, which aims to repeal the death penalty in the state.
Rep. Chris Rabb (D-Philadelphia) cited the 11 death row exonerations from Pennsylvania, racial discrimination in the application of the death penalty, and the high cost of capital cases as reasons for repeal. Rabb stated that “if you are tough on crime, there is zero evidence that the death penalty has any deterrent effect, or that anyone intent on committing the most unspeakable atrocities will review Pennsylvania’s crime code to determine what could happen to them if they get caught.”
Rep. Paul Schemel (R – Franklin), the one Republican member of the committee who joined all 14 Democrats in voting for the bill, said, “Here in Pennsylvania and in the United States where we can safely keep someone imprisoned where they are not going to do harm to anyone else, we should fall on the side of life.”
The Impact of the Death Penalty on Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania currently has 101 inmates on death row, with some sentences dating back to the 1980s. Since Pennsylvania reinstated the death penalty in 1976, only three people have been executed, and all three waived their appeal rights.
Gov. Josh Shapiro announced that he would continue his predecessor’s practice of not signing death warrants and is “calling on the general assembly to work with me to abolish the death penalty once and for all in Pennsylvania.” Shapiro stated that “the system is fallible, but the outcome is irreversible.”
Shapiro’s announcement was made at the Mosaic Community Church in Philadelphia, where he had previously held discussions on criminal justice reform. He was joined by Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney and Philadelphia-area lawmakers.
The Debate Over the Death Penalty in Pennsylvania
Arguments for Repeal
Sen. Vincent Hughes, D-Philadelphia, stated that “the death penalty does not work. It does not offer justice and it does not deter.” Sen. Nikil Saval, D-Philadelphia, described the death penalty as a “racist, classist, and utterly cruel institution,” whose outcomes have been more dependent on socio-economic status than the interest of actual public safety.
Shapiro specifically cited the 2018 mass shooting at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh, where he said “my first reaction back in 2018 was that that killer deserved to be put to death,” but that he later spoke to victims’ families who “said the state should not take his life as punishment for him taking the lives of their loved ones.”
Challenges to Repeal
The committee’s Minority Chairman, Rep. Rob Kauffman (R – Franklin), did not vote for the bill, but indicated he has an open mind on the issue. “While I’m not at the point of supporting this legislation today, I do think this is something worth study, worth further conversation, looking at what this means to the criminal justice system,” he said.
Rep. Tim Bonner (R – Mercer) said he sponsored HB 751, which would raise the evidentiary requirement for the imposition of a death sentence, because the current instructions are confusing.
Expert Analysis and Insights
According to a recent study by the Morning Call of Allentown, the portion of eligible Pennsylvania murder cases in which the death penalty is sought by prosecutors has plummeted in the last two decades, amidst increasing disfavor of the death penalty nationwide.
Under Pennsylvania law, the death penalty can only be imposed in first-degree murder cases which feature at least one of 18 aggravating circumstances. If the accused is convicted of the murder, they are subject to a further penalty hearing to determine if the death sentence will be imposed.
Jurors in such hearings must be death penalty qualified, in which anyone who is fundamentally opposed to imposing the death penalty is excluded from the jury pool – a requirement which skeptics of capital punishment say is an institutional bias in itself.
Efforts to Repeal Pennsylvania’s Death Penalty Resurface
Gov. Josh Shapiro announced that he will continue his predecessor’s practice of not signing death warrants and is calling on the general assembly to abolish the death penalty once and for all in Pennsylvania.
The Legislated Efforts to Repeal the Death Penalty
The committee approved two bills: HB 999, which aims to repeal the death penalty, and HB 751, which would raise the evidentiary requirement for the imposition of a death sentence.
HB 999 and HB 751: A Double-Edged Sword
- HB 999 would repeal the death penalty, while HB 751 would raise the evidentiary requirement for the imposition of a death sentence.
- HB 999 would eliminate the possibility of the death penalty being imposed on defendants, while HB 751 would make it more difficult for prosecutors to secure a death sentence.
- Rep. Chris Rabb (D – Philadelphia) argued that the death penalty is an outdated and ineffective form of punishment.
- Rep. Paul Schemel (R – Franklin) believed that the death penalty should be reserved for extreme cases and that life imprisonment should be the default sentence.
Committee Members’ Views
Committee members expressed varying opinions on the death penalty, with some supporting repeal and others expressing reservations.
Gov. Shapiro’s Role in the Legislative Process
Gov. Josh Shapiro’s announcement represents a shift in his stance on capital punishment, and his involvement in the legislative process is likely to influence the outcome.
The Practical Implications of Repealing the Death Penalty
Repealing the death penalty could lead to the release of prisoners currently on death row.
Impact on Prison Population
- A study by the Morning Call of Allentown found that the number of eligible Pennsylvania murder cases in which the death penalty is sought by prosecutors has plummeted in the last two decades.
- The study also found that the percentage of death row inmates who have been executed has decreased significantly.
Alternative Sentencing Options
Pennsylvania could consider alternative sentencing options, such as life imprisonment without parole or lengthy prison terms, to address the concerns of victims’ families and the public.
Federal Intervention
Repealing the death penalty in Pennsylvania could have implications for federal laws and policies related to capital punishment.
Gov. Shapiro’s Statement on the Death Penalty
Gov. Josh Shapiro said that the death penalty does not work and that it is an outdated form of punishment.
Shapiro’s Evolution on the Death Penalty
Shapiro acknowledged that he had previously been a staunch supporter of the death penalty in certain cases, but that his approach on capital punishment has evolved over time.
“The system is fallible, but the outcome is irreversible,” Shapiro said.
Sen. Vincent Hughes on the Death Penalty
Sen. Vincent Hughes described the death penalty as a “racist, classist, and utterly cruel institution.”
Hughes’ Support for Repeal
Hughes said that the death penalty does not offer justice and does not deter.
Sen. Nikil Saval on the Death Penalty
Sen. Nikil Saval described the death penalty as a “racist, classist, and utterly cruel institution.”
Saval’s Support for Repeal
Saval said that the outcomes of the death penalty have been more dependent on socio-economic status than the interest of actual public safety.
Conclusion
In a state where the death penalty has been a contentious issue for decades, efforts to repeal it in Pennsylvania have resurfaced in recent years. The debate surrounding the death penalty has sparked heated discussions, with proponents arguing that it is an effective tool for punishing heinous crimes, while opponents claim it is a morally reprehensible practice that perpetuates systemic racism and mass incarceration.
The argument against the death penalty centers around its ineffectiveness in reducing crime rates. Studies have consistently shown that states with the death penalty have lower murder rates compared to those without it. Additionally, the execution rate, which is often cited as a metric for the effectiveness of the death penalty, has also been linked to a decrease in crime. Furthermore, the cost of implementing and maintaining the death penalty, including the expenses associated with capital punishment, have become a significant burden on the state. This has led many to question whether the benefits of the death penalty outweigh the costs.
The significance and implications of the death penalty debate are far-reaching, with potential consequences for the lives of individuals on death row and the broader community. As the United States grapples with issues of racial bias and mass incarceration, the death penalty remains a contentious issue that requires careful consideration. It is essential that we examine the evidence and weigh the arguments on both sides before making a decision that will have lasting impacts on our state.