As The Washington Post points out, the Supreme Court's own history points to just how often the justice system gets it wrong. Current Supreme Court Justices Roberts and Thomas have supported maintaining convictions in death penalty cases where those convicted were later exonerated, including that of Tennesse death row exoneree and Witness to Innocence member Paul House. Paul was wrongfully convicted and sentenced to die in 1986 and spent 23 years wrongfully incarcerated on Tennessee's death row. Why don't cases like Paul's haunt Justices Roberts and Thomas? |
|
In a 1993 case, former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in his concurrence that the Constitution does not prevent the government from executing someone who may be innocent. At the time, this claim was considered so outlandish that Justice Sandra Day O'Connor wrote a rebuttal directly countering Scalia's opinion, despite agreeing on the overall outcome of the case. Following the Shinn v. Ramirez ruling, this once-considered outlandish position has become law. This ruling is a reminder to us that the only way we can ensure that innocent people won't be executed is to abolish the death penalty. Thank you for continuing to stand with death row exonerees like Paul House in the fight to abolish the death penalty. Innocence should be enough. Sincerely, KIRKKirk Bloodsworth Executive Director 1st person to be exonerated by DNA from a wrongful death sentence |
|
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.