Time for Reform, Not Abolition: Balancing Justice and Morality through Amendment of the Federal Death Penalty

Authors

Madison Steinkamp

First Page

174

Document Type

Comment

Abstract

In 1987, President Ronald Reagan addressed Congress, saying it was "scandalous and intolerable" that federal law did not provide for an enforceable death penalty.' Ten years prior, following a brief moratorium on its application, the death penalty had been ruled constitutional. While thirty-five states had already reinstated the death penalty at the state level and constitutionally executed ninety-three prisoners since 1976, Congress had not yet enacted the rational, objective standards necessary for applying the death penalty constitutionally. In the year following his speech to Congress, President Reagan successfully signed the federal death penalty into law through the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988. Although the federal death penalty is an eligible punishment for over forty capital offenses, there is restraint in usage, as only sixteen executions have occurred since the reinstatement of the federal death penalty in 1988, making up just one percent of all executions in the United States since 1972. However, this restraint of use should not be seen as evidence of a lack of need for the death penalty. The death penalty is imposed in few cases, all of which constitute crimes that profoundly shock the conscience and threaten society to the highest degrees. As such, it would once again be "scandalous and intolerable" if the proposed Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act is passed without revision, completely abolishing the federal death penalty.' This Comment aims to return the federal death penalty to a punishment reserved for crimes that threaten the existence of the United States, while managing moral and ethical changes in society. Part II provides a brief background on the history of the federal death penalty in the United States and introduces the Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act. Part m discusses the Federal Death Penalty Prohibition Act's failure to recognize the crucial role of the death penalty injustice, deterrence, and public safety, and addresses moral and ethical arguments for abolition. Moreover, Part IV proposes a novel solution for reformation of the current federal death penalty." The solution advocates for a nuanced approach that lessens the applicability of the death penalty to a smaller subset of crimes, and increases procedural safeguards. Finally, Part V concludes that the death penalty must be preserved in federal law as punishment for crimes that threaten the existence of the United States of America, but requires amendment to be imposed in a way that considers the moral and ethical opinions of the modem society.

Recommended Citation

Madison Steinkamp, Time for Reform, Not Abolition: Balancing Justice and Morality through Amendment of the Federal Death Penalty, 36 St. Thomas L. Rev. 174 (2024).
Available at: https://scholarship.stu.edu/stlr/vol36/iss2/6