Racial Bias Highlights Rampant Problems in Death Penalty System

By Christopher Hill, state strategies coordinator with the ACLU Capital Punishment Project.

This year marks the 40th anniversary of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, which produced the groundbreaking Kerner Commission Report. Wanting to understand why uprisings happened in places like Newark and Detroit, President Lyndon Johnson gave the commission a set of questions: "What happened? Why did it happen? What can be done to prevent it from happening again and again?" The most quoted line from the report is that the United States is "moving toward two societies, one black, one white—separate and unequal."  

Similarly, today, there are two death penalty systems in the United States, one minority, one white – separate and unequal. A 2003 Amnesty International report showed that although African-Americans are only 12% of the population of the United States, at that time they were 40% of the people condemned on death row. If this nation is not going to abolish the death penalty, it needs to institute a moratorium until we can figure out why these two death penalty systems have developed and what, if anything, can be done to prevent this clear racial bias from continuing.

There is an abundance of studies which demonstrate that capital punishment suffers from extreme racial bias. A white paper published by the ACLU showed the racism of the federal death penalty. Among other things, it states that people of color were the majority of people who received death sentences in the modern federal death penalty. It also stated that two of the last three people executed in the federal system were people of color, the other being Timothy McVeigh. The issue is not going to resolve itself as the next six people scheduled for federal executions are African-American.

The 2003 Amnesty study found racial bias in the death penalty systems of North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, Texas, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Jersey. The problem cited by Amnesty in most of those states was that defendants were more likely to be sentenced to death if their victim was white and that the racial configuration most likely to receive capital punishment is black defendants convicted of killing white victims.  

Similar studies have shown the existence of the same racial bias in the death penalty systems of California, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Maryland and North Carolina. An American Sociological Review article from 2007 showed that minorities capitally sentenced for killing white people were more likely to have their sentences carried out than minorities who kill non-whites.One of the authors of the study said, "[w]hite lives are still valued more than black ones when it comes to deciding who gets executed and who does not."

Given the disparities in both the federal and state capital punishment system, it is time to start asking the questions President Johnson posed forty years ago: "what is happening" and "why is it happening?" Until we get satisfactory answers to those questions, we should stop using the death penalty.

•  Death penalty

  2003 Amnesty study found racial bias in the death penalty systems of North Carolina, South Carolina, Maryland, Texas, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and New Jersey. The problem cited by Amnesty in most of those states was that defendants were more likely to be sentenced to death if their victim was white and that the racial configuration most likely to receive capital punishment is black defendants convicted of killing white victims.  

  Needs to be abolished.

  Too bad this is not a very "sexy" subject, have not heard a peep from either of the two Dems. running for Prez.

  by Philly Quaker on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:04:37 AM PDT

  •  its not at the forefront of Obama's

    stump speech, but it is something he's worked on in Illinois in the past.  While not taking an outright ban approach he's keenly aware of the disproportionate effect.  I think his justice department will be more aware and responsive on this issue.

    by jfromga on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:35:08 AM PDT

•  I agree100%!

  I am adamantly opposed to the death penalty, and have always been opposed to the death penalty. The racism inherent is shameful.

  by lyvwyr101 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:04:40 AM PDT

•  thanks for posting this here

  by catchaz on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:10:04 AM PDT

•  Slightly OT but important

  Why has no one yet posted a diary on the Sean Bell verdict in New York City.

  I would, but I'm socked in at work, but I think this is something that needs to be talked about around here instead of more "Hillary sucks, yay Obama" diaries.

  by nrafter530 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:16:45 AM PDT

  •  I did

    The Sean Bell Verdict

    I wouldn't normally pimp my diary but you asked.

    by Tom Paul on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 01:06:36 PM PDT

•  I'm still for abolition

  The death penalty has long been considered a "third rail" of American politics, and especially since Michael Dukakis, the Democratic party has essentially abandoned any efforts towards opposing it. Bill Clinton made a point of demonstrably supporting capital punishment in 1992, leaving New Hampshire briefly before the primary to ensure that the execution of Ricky Ray Rector was carried out in Arkansas. Many Democrats, including presumably many Kossacks, strongly support it. Now we have a president who once snidely mocked a condemned woman's pleas for mercy.

  But I'm an unreconstructed lefty and won't give up the hope that the death penalty will be abolished some day. It doesn't do us a damn bit of good. And frankly, I think the widespread acceptance of execution, with its assumption that prisoners are less than human, is one of the factors that led to the appalling regime of torture that has now disgraced our nation.

  Kudos to the ACLU for keeping attention focused on the inequities that have always plagued this awful practice.

  by Buckeye Hamburger on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:17:26 AM PDT

•  Question

  First I want to make it clear that I am a member of the ACLU and am opposed to the death penalty

  but

  A 2003 Amnesty International report showed that although African-Americans are only 12% of the population of the United States, at that time they were 40% of the people condemned on death row.

  This is irrelevant isn't it?  The death penalty isn't imposed by a random selection from the general population.  It is imposed on people who commit crimes that fall under the death penalty statutes.  So if 90% of all murders were committed by African-Americans then one could argue that the system is biased against white people!

  So the question is, what is the racial breakdown of murder convictions that could have received the death penalty?  Are juries more likely to give leniency to a white defendant?  Are prosecutors more likely to seek the death penalty against African-Americans?  These are harder questions to answer but ultimately they have much more meaning.

  And if the problem with the death penalty system is simply that it is racist, why not start a campaign to execute more white people?  

  by Tom Paul on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:22:45 AM PDT

•  Wasn't it ACLU's doing to demand

  that juries be given absolute discretion as to death sentences.  ACLU (and its allies) contended that mandatory death penalty for some crimes was unconstitutional and that the jury must be given discretion.  Well, you can't have it both ways then.  You can't complain that mandatory death penalty (applied equally to anyone convicted of a given crime) is problematic and then simultaneously complain that discretionary imposition of the death penalty is problematic.

  by Drgrishka1 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 09:59:27 AM PDT

  •  I don't think you're right about that.

    I think the ACLU generally has opposed mandatory death sentences, juries notwithstanding.

    by rhutcheson on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 07:50:15 PM PDT

    •  That's my point

      If you argue that mandatory death sentences are unconstitutional, and demand jury discretion, then you can't really complain when juries exercise that discretion.

      by Drgrishka1 on Fri Apr 25, 2008 at 08:26:37 PM PDT

      •  So you think that

        because the ACLU opposed mandatory death sentences that it supported the death sentence itself?

        by rhutcheson on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 08:44:44 AM PDT

        •  No... I am suggesting that their stance is

          dishonest.  I understand that they oppose the detah penalty overall.  That is an honest position, one I disagree with, but an honest one.  What is dishonest is an attempt to suggest that the system allows for too much discretion after they were the cause of that discretion in the 1st place.

          by Drgrishka1 on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 01:32:53 PM PDT

          •  I see, but please look at

            the study cited in the article, which concludes that

            .the findings suggest that African Americans on death row for killing nonwhites are less likely to be executed than other condemned prisoners.
            The evidence corroborates hypotheses that Hispanics also face higher execution probabilities if their victims are white.

            If that is the case (I don't think the citation proves it by any means), wouldn't you agree that's conclusive in arguing against the current death penalty regime?

            by rhutcheson on Sat Apr 26, 2008 at 02:23:20 PM PDT