Carol Steiker
👤 PersonAppearances Over Time
Podcast Appearances
are cruel and unusual, the way being struck by lightning is cruel and unusual. There's just no rhyme or reason about who gets the death penalty. And, you know, we would say it's like totally rando is what we would say today. What he said is it's wanton and freakish, the application of the death penalty. Wanton and freakish, struck by lightning.
Yeah, well, what happened was I think the justices miscalculated where standards of decency had evolved to because there was – a tremendous backlash to Furman. Someone stood up in the Georgia legislature and introduces a new death penalty scheme that attempts to guide juror discretion. And between 1972 and 1976, 35 states and the federal government
Yeah, well, what happened was I think the justices miscalculated where standards of decency had evolved to because there was – a tremendous backlash to Furman. Someone stood up in the Georgia legislature and introduces a new death penalty scheme that attempts to guide juror discretion. And between 1972 and 1976, 35 states and the federal government
Yeah, well, what happened was I think the justices miscalculated where standards of decency had evolved to because there was – a tremendous backlash to Furman. Someone stood up in the Georgia legislature and introduces a new death penalty scheme that attempts to guide juror discretion. And between 1972 and 1976, 35 states and the federal government
pass new death penalty statutes attempting to give the guidance that Stewart and White said was lacking in Furman so that they could keep the death penalty. And they start sentencing people to death.
pass new death penalty statutes attempting to give the guidance that Stewart and White said was lacking in Furman so that they could keep the death penalty. And they start sentencing people to death.
pass new death penalty statutes attempting to give the guidance that Stewart and White said was lacking in Furman so that they could keep the death penalty. And they start sentencing people to death.
Charles Manson got off of death row. Sirhan Sirhan, who had just shot Bobby Kennedy, you know, he got off of death row. So people were kind of outraged. Like, Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan are not going to get executed? No.
Charles Manson got off of death row. Sirhan Sirhan, who had just shot Bobby Kennedy, you know, he got off of death row. So people were kind of outraged. Like, Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan are not going to get executed? No.
Charles Manson got off of death row. Sirhan Sirhan, who had just shot Bobby Kennedy, you know, he got off of death row. So people were kind of outraged. Like, Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan are not going to get executed? No.
in California with like almost instantaneously, you know, California has all of these initiatives and referendums and the people passed by initiative, they amended the California constitution to allow the death penalty. So you might've thought, doesn't California still have the death penalty? Yes, it does. But how do they do that?
in California with like almost instantaneously, you know, California has all of these initiatives and referendums and the people passed by initiative, they amended the California constitution to allow the death penalty. So you might've thought, doesn't California still have the death penalty? Yes, it does. But how do they do that?
in California with like almost instantaneously, you know, California has all of these initiatives and referendums and the people passed by initiative, they amended the California constitution to allow the death penalty. So you might've thought, doesn't California still have the death penalty? Yes, it does. But how do they do that?
If the California constitution says you can't have it because the people instantaneously amended the constitution and, after the California Supreme Court abolished it constitutionally.
If the California constitution says you can't have it because the people instantaneously amended the constitution and, after the California Supreme Court abolished it constitutionally.
If the California constitution says you can't have it because the people instantaneously amended the constitution and, after the California Supreme Court abolished it constitutionally.
There's no way the court can ignore that. It has to decide whether these new statutes are OK or not.