In a divided country and society, many prominent issues cross Americans’ minds daily, with countless individuals expressing strong feelings about them. Yet one critical issue often slips through the cracks of Americans’ minds despite being a literal life-or-death matter: the death penalty.
Despite the death penalty having a long-standing history as a punishment for crime in America, evidence suggests that it fails to serve as an effective deterrent to crime. Furthermore, it disproportionately affects marginalized communities, while also being morally questionable, if not unconstitutional.
Statistics reveal the inherent flaws in carrying out capital punishment. According to the Equal Justice Initiative, “More than 160 people have been exonerated from death row since 1973” (equaljusticeintiative.org). This number highlights the fallibility of the judicial system and serves as a stark reminder that each person on death row is a real, actual, human, facing death, even if they were wrongly convicted.
Moreover, the Pew Research Center conducted a study that found “about 72 percent of executions in the U.S. are set to be carried out in just 12 states.” This demonstrates a geographical bias, leading to a concentration of executions in areas often linked to racial and socioeconomic disparities. It reveals that the trial location significantly influences the imposition of the death penalty, not merely the crime or the individual convicted.
Research also shows that the death penalty disproportionately affects people of color. According to the American Civil Liberties Union, “Murderers of White victims are more likely to be sentenced to death than murderers of Black victims” (aclu.org). This disparity highlights a deeply entrenched racial bias within our judicial system and raises ethical concerns about the fairness of the application of capital punishment, further contributing to its irrationalness.
Beyond its inefficacies, numerous studies indicate that the death penalty does not effectively deter crime. The National Academy of Sciences concluded in a comprehensive review that, “The death penalty does not have a unique deterrent effect on homicide or other violent crimes” (nasonline.org). This finding challenges the belief that fear of execution prevents crime — a primary argument for supporting the death penalty. Instead, it is factors like socioeconomic status, education, and community resources that play much larger roles in influencing crime rates and death penalty sentences.
Despite all of this, and a Supreme Court in 1976 ruling that the death penalty was not unconstitutional, many legal experts argue the contrary. Prominent attorney and founder of the Equal Justice Initiative Bryan Stevenson asserts, “The death penalty is a relic of a political era, and failure of justice” (equaljusticeintiative.org). Through his work and writings, he emphasizes the arbitrary nature of its application which often leads to unfair sentences, particularly within marginalized communities. He goes on to highlight that the death penalty removes due process and other fundamental aspects of our criminal justice system, through the appellate process, further contributing to the cycle of perpetual punishment being served rather than justice and mercy (equaljusticeintiative.org).
Consequently, as these issues plague society they are being addressed in our very own school. In English Teacher Della June’s AP English Language and Composition class, students have been reading the novel Just Mercy by Bryan Stevenson, which illuminates the devastating consequences of a flawed criminal justice system. June described the novel as “a captivating story told from the perspective of Bryan Stevenson, a lawyer in Alabama during the ‘80s, focusing on issues in our criminal justice system like the death penalty through real cases he represented such as that of Walter McMillian, an innocent man sentenced to the death penalty and even put on Death Row before his case was even tried.”
Junior Blaize Roth pointed out that by reading the book he developed a new belief that children should not be tried for life sentences or subjected to the death penalty. His realization reflects the growing consensus that capital punishment is targeted at vulnerable populations, including youth and people of color, further perpetuating systematic inequalities, and highlighting the unjust nature of capital punishment.
Junior Samantha Barton said, “The inequalities people face, especially in terms of poverty and race, play a significant role in determining who gets the death penalty.” Her realization highlights the systemic bias surrounding the death penalty where individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds often receive harsher sentences based on factors unrelated to their actual guilt or innocence.
This structural inequality contributes to the notion that capital punishment is more about punishment than justice. Each death penalty case has someone’s life on the line, further reinforcing the need for a compassionate understanding of the complexities of human behavior in our legal system. By embracing a legal framework rooted in understanding and empathy, we can dismantle the barriers perpetuating injustice, and ultimately the death penalty.
June’s class is doing just this at the grass-roots level, engaging in discussions around these topics which according to June “fosters a deeper understanding of the nuances surrounding the death penalty and the broader criminal justice system.” June said, “Structured dialogues allow students to explore their feelings and opinions about these critical issues in a safe environment, and we are doing these in Socratic Seminars.”
Such conversations are crucial in shaping a more informed and empathetic generation, capable of advocating for change. It is dialogue and civil discourse like this that can forge a path toward reformation in our criminal justice system, ensuring that no more lives are lost to a flawed system, and that is why as a society, we must not just base our rhetoric off empathy like this, but ultimately our actions.