If Newsom feels that strongly about the death penalty why doesn't the sorry P.O.S. shut down the abortion clinics?
I said in the OP why it isn't.
The 2016 vote of the people of the state of California says otherwise.
California Proposition 62, Repeal of the Death Penalty (2016) - Ballotpedia
Proposition 62 failed to pass. How does that show that people of this state oppose the death penalty?
My bad. I misread the post. Of course it shows that the people don't support Newsome's decision.
If you're arguing that it's a badly-written EO, I agree with you... .
Proposition 62 failed to pass. How does that show that people of this state oppose the death penalty?
My bad. I misread the post. Of course it shows that the people don't support Newsome's decision.
No. That isn't what I'm arguing. The EO says exactly what it's supposed to.
Your problem is that you apparently literally cannot believe that it is what it is and you're purposely seeing a different reality to compensate, including misreading my argument. That's the charitable interpretation.
I'm a nuts and bolts kind of guy.... the EO says what the Governor wants done, but not how.... so how do we get there from here? Is it even possible? So I look at the problem from that perspective.... Article 5 §8 (a) reprieve power is what I came up with. Does it make the Governor's EO somehow less valid because he didn't state that himself? I don't think so. What's important is that he is exercising authority that is rightfully his.... and not usurping authority that isn't.
Do I wish the Governor reached out to the Attorney General for his input? Absolutely. He deserves to be wrapped on the knuckles for signing such a sloppy piece of work. It gives me cause for concern if this is going to be his style of governance going ahead. But I'm sure as hell not going to lose sleep over it.
OK. You're stuck in your own reality. Have at it.
Of course the easiest way to fix this problem is to put greater emphasis on processing cases where the convicted might be innocent, perhaps by expediting DNA testing, or via other means, thus narrowing it down to...oh say perhaps, maybe two or three, or even one, or even by some miracle...ZERO innocent people on Death Row.
Yes, that's hoping for a lot, I realize that. It's aspirational.
It's also maybe not as much fun as running around accusing someone of unconstitutional abuses of power...when they're not a Republican.
After all, doing something about the high number of innocent people on Death Row might inspire the Governor to drop the moratorium and reinstate practice of the death penalty once again. That would take away all the fun.
Thirty-three potentially innocent people on Death Row...this is the bigger problem.
And by the way, this is the governor's clemency power by the California constitution:
It is FAR from absolute, is limited by statute, and is to be done case-by-case, by application:
https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Application_for_Executive_Clemency.pdf
There is no blanket authority for the governor to do this.
The Governor may not grant a pardon or commutation to a person twice convicted of a felony except on recommendation of the Supreme Court, 4 judges concurring.
I think you may have missed the more important clause:
I wonder how many death row inmates only have a single felony conviction, and whether at least four CA Supreme Court judges have signed off on this order.
That's only for pardons and commutations.... reprieves from death row are a different matter entirely - the inmates would still be incarcerated, they just won't be subject to capital punishment.
But that's what a reprieve from the death sentence is: a commutation.