Presidential Candidate Donald Trump in a speech in Portsmouth,
New Hampshire, restated his support for police officers and for the death
penalty for those who kill them. Then, according to The Atlantic, he articulated a new proposal to demonstrate
that support:
One of the first things I’d do in terms of executive
order if I win would be to sign a strong, strong statement that will go out
to the country, out to the world, that anybody caught killing a policeman,
policewoman, police officer, anybody killing a police officer: death
penalty. It’s gonna happen. OK? We can’t let this go.
At least three problems with this idea spring to
mind.
First, the U.S. Supreme Court forbade mandatory
death sentences in 1976 with its ruling in Woodson v. North Carolina.
Central to the Court’s ruling was the justices’ opposition to punishing
all murderers alike without regard for the aggravating or mitigating
circumstances of each case. But the justices also feared that mandatory
death sentences would compel jurors to hand down not-guilty verdicts for
otherwise guilty defendants who they did not think deserved to die. Although
Justice Clarence Thomas hinted at the possibility of revisiting Woodson in
his Glossip v. Gross concurrence in June, the other justices did
not seem eager to do so.
Second, the death penalty is largely administered
by the states, not the federal government. Roughly 3,000 inmates currently
sit on death row in the United States; only about 60 of them are in the federal
system. President Trump would have no lawful power to influence state
criminal-justice systems, whether by executive order or any other mechanism
at his disposal. Any efforts to the contrary would violate the federal
character of the Constitution.
Finally, and most importantly, the president
doesn’t have the lawful power to unilaterally impose a criminal punishment
on anyone, whether it be a fine, a prison sentence, or death. Presidents
can wield the pardoning power to reduce or remove punishments for federal
crimes, but they can neither increase nor enact them. The American legal
system delegates that responsibility to judges and juries. Infringing
on that separation of power through executive order would, at minimum,
violate the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments’ guarantees of due process.
To read more CLICK HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment