Will Massachusetts bring back the death penalty?

A bill to reinstate the death penalty is being considered by the Legislature, but only about a third of state residents support capital punishment. 

Kiichiro Sato/AP
This November 2005, file photo, shows the death chamber at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility in Lucasville, Ohio. With two dozen scheduled executions in limbo, Ohio officials sent a forceful letter to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Friday, Oct. 9, 2015, asserting the state believes it can obtain a lethal injection drug from overseas without violating any laws. (AP Photo/Kiichiro Sato, File)

Does history repeat itself? In Massachusetts it might.

Thanks to the state's liberal politics and large proportion of Catholics, the Bay State has long held a distaste for the death penalty, holding its most recent execution in 1947. But now the state legislature is weighing a bill to reinstate capital punishment, according to The Associated Press.

In 1975, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court curtailed capital punishment, prompting a push for an amendment to the state's constitution that would have restored it. Voters approved this in 1982, and  the governor signed a law reinstating the death penalty for certain cases, according to Channel 5 WCVB. But two years later, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court determined that law to be unconstitutional, in effect banning capital punishment.

In 1997, the House was one vote shy of restoring capital punishment after the killing of a 10-year-old boy in Cambridge.

Since then, support for the death penalty among legislators and the public has receded.

This year, a Gallup poll showed 60 percent of Americans find the death penalty morally acceptable. That’s only a three percent drop since 2001.

But according to the Boston Globe, about a third of Massachusetts citizens support the death penalty, yet less than a fifth supported the death penalty for Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who was convicted for his involvement in the 2013 Boston Marathon Bombings and subsequently sentenced to death. Even the family of Martin Richard, a boy who died in the blasts, didn’t want the death penalty because they feared it would result in an endless appeals process.

As the Christian Science Monitor’s Jessica Mendoza reported this summer, Nebraska passed a law repealing the death penalty, which was later challenged by an advocacy group that said it collected enough signatures to suspend the repeal and send the issue back to voters for the 2016 election.

In recent years, the drugs used in lethal injections have been in short supply, and some critics claim lethal injection is cruel and unusual punishment after seemingly botched executions. As CNN reported last month, when prison officials administered a lethal injection to an inmate, his execution became on of the longest in US history while “he moaned and writhed on the gurney for 43 minutes before dying of a heart attack.”

In June, the Supreme Court ruled that the use of a drug some blame for the apparently botched executions, midazolam, was constitutional.  

This report contains material from The Associated Press.  

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Will Massachusetts bring back the death penalty?
Read this article in
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today