Dakota Blackwell, contributor

The discussion surrounding the death penalty is a widely controversial and heated debate. Although many countries have abolished the practice, several, including the United States, still use it as a method of punishment for extreme crimes. Crimes punishable by the death penalty include the killing or kidnapping of a Congressman, the President or a Supreme Court justice, murder, treason and genocide. However, this form of punishment is becoming increasingly scrutinized for its ethical implications. Does the death penalty have a place in a modern society that claims to value human rights?

One of the primary arguments against the death penalty is that it interferes with the basic human right within the Constitution to be free from cruel and unusual punishment. Beyond that, the death penalty disproportionately affects individuals with mental illnesses and disabilities, as well as those from vulnerable, financially disadvantaged communities — particularly BIPOC. These individuals often face systemic barriers to proper legal representation, making them more likely to receive this irreversible punishment. The injustice in the system is glaring when we consider how unevenly the death penalty is applied based on race and socioeconomic status.

Another issue surrounding the death penalty is its sheer brutality. How can we call ourselves a civilized society when we’re willing to use state-sanctioned murder as a form of punishment? The death penalty isn’t just a form of justice. It’s an act of violence, hiding behind the law to justify itself. This hypocrisy is especially troubling in a system that has proven itself flawed time and time again. Innocent people have been and are continuously being sent to death row. Time after time, innocent people have been executed only for evidence to surface later that could have exonerated them. Adding on to that point, there have been many instances where evidence has proven the innocence of these poor people, just for the court to dismiss it, sending these individuals to a brutal death that they did not deserve. Furthermore, these instances of proven innocence have been blocked from being shown in court because of the sheer systemic oppression of the prison system and the barring of proper representation. 

Looking at prevalent stories in the news right now, two individuals are facing or have already received the death penalty: Robert Roberson, whose execution is set for Oct. 17, and Marcellus Williams, who was executed on Sept. 24. Both men have enough evidence to prove their innocence, but the court system has refused or is refusing to acknowledge the new evidence. This is evidence of the failure of our justice system. These men have been denied the basic right to safety and fairness in our country and our Constitution has failed them. If we know our justice system isn’t perfect, how can we justify the death penalty at all? It is inhumane, plain and simple. Life imprisonment is a far less barbaric option, leaving room for potential correction when mistakes are made.