Death Penalty Trajectory & Reform
- WULR Team
- Feb 12
- 4 min read
The State of Capital Punishment
Published February 12 2025
Analysis by Zinnia Kardi
Capital punishment, more commonly known as the death penalty, has long been a topic of contention within the United States. Despite a global trend away from this form of punishment, the U.S. remains one of few developed nations still practicing its sentencing, with legislation determined at the state level. Currently, 23 out of 50 states have abolished the death penalty entirely, while six others have moratoriums on executions (1). Among the states still upholding the death penalty, reforms to these policies are constantly under ongoing review and implementation. This raises the question of whether the death penalty is still able to hold a legitimate place in a modern justice system.
Death penalty reform in the United States can be traced to long-standing efforts to limit and define sentencing. Capital punishment has been widely practiced throughout history. As the U.S. justice system evolved, reforms began emerging in the 19th century, with states reducing the scope of crimes punishable by death and introducing alternative sentencing options. This led certain states to abolish the death penalty entirely in favor of options like life sentences in prison, sometimes without parole. National reforms continued into the 20th century, marked by landmark Supreme Court cases further defining and restricting capital punishment. A pivotal moment came with Furman v. Georgia (1972), when the Supreme Court ruled the death penalty was unconstitutional due to arbitrary and discriminatory application, which led to a temporary nationwide halt (2). In response, states revised their death penalty statutes to ensure more consistent sentencing, ultimately leading to the reinstatement of capital punishment after the ruling of Gregg v. Georgia in 1976 (3). Subsequent Supreme Court cases, such as Atkins v. Virginia (2002), further restricted the application of the death penalty and ruled executing individuals with intellectual disabilities constitutes cruel and unusual punishment (4). More recently, in Madison v. Alabama (2019), the Court expanded on this protection, ruling that individuals with dementia and other severe cognitive impairments affecting their rationality may also be exempt from execution (5).
Similar concerns about the death penalty’s disproportionate impact on vulnerable populations, particularly individuals with mental illness, have continued to drive legislative reforms today. Research estimates that 20% of people on death row suffer from a serious mental illness, of 2,213 individuals sentenced to death as of July (6). This statistic underscores the ethical issues surrounding the fairness of capital punishment, as individuals with mental health issues may not fully understand their actions or the consequences of their sentences. It is estimated for every 8.3 executions carried out, one person is exonerated (7). Furthermore, racial disparities in death penalty cases persist: of the 41 death-row exonerations in the past decade, a significant majority of the individuals were African American, revealing not only racial bias but also the risk of wrongful convictions, especially ones targeting racial minorities (8). These disparities, along with the recognition of mental illness as a mitigating factor, highlight the systemic flaws of the death penalty, reinforcing the need for reforms and protections for these communities.
To address these problems, many states are choosing to reform their legislation or abolish capital punishment entirely. One of the most notable recent reforms is Ohio's 2021 law, which prohibits the execution of individuals with severe mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia, who were symptomatic at the time of their crime (9). Similarly, California passed a bill focusing on expanding mental incapacity protections earlier this year, despite having a moratorium on executions (10). This growing momentum reflects a broader reevaluation of not only mental health and cognitive impairments in death penalty cases but also systemic issues. These issues make the death penalty an increasingly controversial and often unworkable aspect of the criminal justice system. Rather than focus on reform, other states have recently chosen to abolish the death penalty in favor of different sentences such as life without parole to address these issues with capital punishment. Most recently, Washington state officially removed the death penalty from state legislation in 2023 following an unconstitutional ruling due to racial discrimination and arbitrariness (11).
Despite the growing momentum for reform and abolition, however, the future of the death penalty remains uncertain, especially with the return of former President Trump and his administration. His decision to resume federal executions during his first term, after a long hiatus, underscored the divide in national views on capital punishment (12). Overseeing an unprecedented 13 executions carried out in just six months, his administration's approach stands in stark contrast to the growing abolitionist sentiment at the state level (13). Trump's vocal support for the federal death penalty suggests his administration may push for a resumption of federal executions after his inauguration in 2025 and also support policies favoring state-level capital punishment. Meanwhile, multiple proposed bills in states have attempted to reinstate the death penalty or lower the thresholds for eligibility, as was the case in Florida, suggesting a potential for the resurgence of political support against the trend.
Questions persist regarding which crimes, if any, justify such a sentence, as well as the ethical concerns around minimizing inherent biases in its application. Although public support for capital punishment has remained high overall, support for the death penalty has slightly declined in recent years (14). Regardless of individual stance, there is a growing consensus on the risks involved, including the discriminatory impact on marginalized communities and the irreversible consequence of wrongful convictions. In reflecting on these issues, we must carefully examine whether capital punishment aligns with contemporary standards of fairness and justice.
“State by State.” Death Penalty Information Center, (n.d.) https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/states-landing
Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972).
Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976)
Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002)
Madison v. Alabama, 586 U.S. ___ (2019)
Widmer, William. “Recent Rulings in Some States Bar Death Penalty for People with Serious Mental Illness.” Equal Justice Initiative June 6, 2024. https://eji.org/news/recent-rulings-in-some-states-bar-death-penalty-for-people-with-serious-mental-illness/
“DPIC Special Report: The Innocence Epidemic.” Death Penalty Information Center, March 3, 2021 https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/dpic-reports/dpic-special-reports/dpic-special-report-the-innocence-epidemic
Ibid.
Ohio H.B. 136, 133rd Gen. Assemb. (2019-2020).
California S.B. 1001, 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (2018).
“State by State: Washington.” Death Penalty Information Center, (n.d.) https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/state-by-state/washington.
Tarm, Michael and Kunzelman, Michael “Trump administration carries out 13th and final execution.” AP News, October 11, 2018. https://apnews.com/general-news-28e44cc5c026dc16472751bbde0ead50.
Ibid.
McCarthy, Justin. “Steady 55% of Americans Support Death Penalty for Murderers.” Gallup, November 29, 2022. https://news.gallup.com/poll/404975/steady-americans-support-death-penalty-murderers.aspx.
Comments