4 ms·

This is an interesting situation where the judicial system seems truly out of control. Republicans are generally more likely to be in favor of the death penalty

This is an interesting situation where the judicial system seems truly out of control. Republicans are generally more likely to be in favor of the death penalty, but the attorney general and governor are Republicans that have intervened because they believe that justice is being miscarried. Nevertheless, the appeals court is forcing an execution. Perhaps the panel of judges is using stare decisis to conclude: "you had your chance to present the truth before, but didn't, so too bad". If the entire political spectrum disagrees with the judges, it makes a clear case that the problem is the system. I hope the governor will grant pardon or clemency if the court won't reconsider.

mulmen 3y ago
Clemency seems like the correct remedy here. The court only interprets the law as it is written. The system has a failsafe for this situation. Clemency is that failsafe. This is yet another example of why legislatures need to eliminate capital punishment. It's something we have to get right 100% of the time, and that is impossible.
- ceejayoz 3y ago
  > The court can't just decide to not enforce the law. The court doesn't enforce anything; that's the executive's job. They can decide the law is unconstitutional, and thus unenforcable.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    You're right. Updated.
- biomcgary 3y ago
  Under the circumstances, clemency does seem like the best option to me. However, it does not roll back the guilty verdict, which would(?) be possible if resolved within the judicial arm rather than the executive.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    Except it can't be resolved in the judicial arm because the law of Oklahoma explicitly prohibits that from happening.
    - biomcgary 3y ago
      The explicit prohibition that you are referring to: is it explicit in the law written by the legislature or made explicit by prior case law (i.e., judicial interpretation)? I'm curious because I've heard arguments for and against common law that this seems relevant to, if the latter.
      - mulmen 3y ago
        From GavinMcG's (currently top) comment [1] in this thread: > The statute in question ([0] – see (D)(8)) says the court may not consider the merits or grant relief unless there are facts or legal rationales that could not have been raised earlier. The court isn't empowered to do something just because two parties agree. [0] https://casetext.com/statute/oklahoma-statutes/title-22-criminal-procedure/uniform-post-conviction-procedure-act/section-1089-capital-cases-post-conviction-relief-grounds-for-appeal https://casetext.com/statute/oklahoma-statutes/title-22-crim... [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35780147 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35780147
        biomcgary 3y ago
        Thank you, I missed that.
mason55 3y ago
> where the judicial system seems truly out of control I don't think this is true at all. The judicial system is following the laws that the legislature has laid out. Unless the laws are unconstitutional (which no one seems to be arguing) then this is actually a case where the judicial system is 100% not out of control. And, in fact, nothing gives them the power to act here, so they aren't acting. All they've done is refuse to step in to a spot that has no place defined for them. > it makes a clear case that the problem is the system Yes, but the system that's the problem isn't the judges. It's the law that's been decided upon and never fixed. The judges can't just decide that they aren't going to enforce the law unless someone is arguing that the law itself is invalid, which no one is doing. It's an unfortunate situation but it's one with a real remedy. The remedy is not "courts ignore legislature," it's "governor grants clemency or pardon."
- bee_rider 3y ago
  One possibility I guess could be for the state to put “don’t murder innocent people” in their constitution. It just seems like an odd caveat to need.
  - mulmen 3y ago
    In this case the man is guilty in the eyes of the court and there is no mechanism by which they can reevaluate that decision given this new information. The problem is the law does not give them this ability and that the death penalty is a possible outcome. Neither of these are problems the court can fix. The solution here is on the legislature and executive.
    - bee_rider 3y ago
      Could a religious liberty case be made? I mean, I am not religious, but I’d be surprised if the Christian god would be OK killing a person over a technicality. Oklahoma is a pretty religious place, right? I imagine the execution could be hard to perform if enough people didn’t comply. At least it could be enough of a delay to stall a bit and hopefully work things out…
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

mulmen 3y ago

Clemency seems like the correct remedy here. The court only interprets the law as it is written. The system has a failsafe for this situation. Clemency is that failsafe. This is yet another example of why legislatures need to eliminate capital punishment. It's something we have to get right 100% of the time, and that is impossible.

ceejayoz 3y ago
> The court can't just decide to not enforce the law. The court doesn't enforce anything; that's the executive's job. They can decide the law is unconstitutional, and thus unenforcable.
- mulmen 3y ago
  You're right. Updated.
biomcgary 3y ago
Under the circumstances, clemency does seem like the best option to me. However, it does not roll back the guilty verdict, which would(?) be possible if resolved within the judicial arm rather than the executive.
- mulmen 3y ago
  Except it can't be resolved in the judicial arm because the law of Oklahoma explicitly prohibits that from happening.
  - biomcgary 3y ago
    The explicit prohibition that you are referring to: is it explicit in the law written by the legislature or made explicit by prior case law (i.e., judicial interpretation)? I'm curious because I've heard arguments for and against common law that this seems relevant to, if the latter.
    - mulmen 3y ago
      From GavinMcG's (currently top) comment [1] in this thread: > The statute in question ([0] – see (D)(8)) says the court may not consider the merits or grant relief unless there are facts or legal rationales that could not have been raised earlier. The court isn't empowered to do something just because two parties agree. [0] https://casetext.com/statute/oklahoma-statutes/title-22-criminal-procedure/uniform-post-conviction-procedure-act/section-1089-capital-cases-post-conviction-relief-grounds-for-appeal https://casetext.com/statute/oklahoma-statutes/title-22-crim... [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35780147 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35780147
      - biomcgary 3y ago
        Thank you, I missed that.

mason55 3y ago

> where the judicial system seems truly out of control I don't think this is true at all. The judicial system is following the laws that the legislature has laid out. Unless the laws are unconstitutional (which no one seems to be arguing) then this is actually a case where the judicial system is 100% not out of control. And, in fact, nothing gives them the power to act here, so they aren't acting. All they've done is refuse to step in to a spot that has no place defined for them. > it makes a clear case that the problem is the system Yes, but the system that's the problem isn't the judges. It's the law that's been decided upon and never fixed. The judges can't just decide that they aren't going to enforce the law unless someone is arguing that the law itself is invalid, which no one is doing. It's an unfortunate situation but it's one with a real remedy. The remedy is not "courts ignore legislature," it's "governor grants clemency or pardon."

bee_rider 3y ago
One possibility I guess could be for the state to put “don’t murder innocent people” in their constitution. It just seems like an odd caveat to need.
- mulmen 3y ago
  In this case the man is guilty in the eyes of the court and there is no mechanism by which they can reevaluate that decision given this new information. The problem is the law does not give them this ability and that the death penalty is a possible outcome. Neither of these are problems the court can fix. The solution here is on the legislature and executive.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    Could a religious liberty case be made? I mean, I am not religious, but I’d be surprised if the Christian god would be OK killing a person over a technicality. Oklahoma is a pretty religious place, right? I imagine the execution could be hard to perform if enough people didn’t comply. At least it could be enough of a delay to stall a bit and hopefully work things out…

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]