DPIC releases new report focused on “How the U.S. Electoral Process Increases the Arbitrariness of the Death Penalty”

Via email, I learned that this morning the Death Penalty Information Center release this big report titled “Lethal Election: How the U.S. Electoral Process Increases the Arbitrariness of the Death Penalty.”   This DPIC press release about the report provides this summary: “The Report uses new data and analysis on appellate rulings and grants of clemency, as well as individual stories and case studies from across the country, to reveal how electoral politcs distort the fairness and accuracy of capital punishment, and how decreasing public support for the death penalty is changing the picture.” 

This DPIC report webpage provides some videos and other supplemental materials.  And the full 60+-page report begins with an “Executive Summary: Key Finding”:

Elected supreme court justices in Georgia, North Carolina, and Ohio are twice as likely to affirm death penalty cases during an election year than in any other year.  This effect is statistically significant when controlling for the number of cases each year.

Changing public opinion means that zealous support for the death penalty is no longer a litmus test for elected officials in many death penalty jurisdictions.  Today’s elections feature viable candidates who criticize use of the death penalty and pledge reforms or even non-use, reflecting the significant decline in public support for the death penalty.

Elected governors were more likely to grant clemency in the past when they did not face voters in an upcoming election.  Concerns about voter “backlash” have eased today with declining public support and low numbers of new death sentences and executions, and have led to an increased number of prisoners benefiting from clemency grants, especially mass grants, in recent years.