WASHINGTON — Just a few months after taking office, Attorney General Merrick Garland issued a moratorium halting federal executions — a stark contrast after his predecessor carried out 13 in six months. Under Garland’s watch and a president who promised to abolish the death penalty, the Justice Department took no new death penalty cases.
That changed Friday when federal prosecutors said they would seek the death penalty for a white supremacist who killed 10 black people in a Buffalo supermarket. The decision does not change the halt to federal executions, but Garland’s first approval of a new prosecution opens a new chapter in the long and complicated history of the death penalty in the US.
These complexities have been fully visible in recent years. President Joe Biden campaigned in part on a promise to abolish it, but has taken few concrete steps to do so. Under Garland’s leadership, the Justice Department has significantly retreated from the use of the death penalty, but has also shown a continued willingness to use it in certain cases.
White House spokesman Andrew Bates did not comment on the decision in the Buffalo case on Friday, saying the president had discussed his views on the matter and would leave individual cases to the appropriate authorities. The Justice Department, in line with its practice in ongoing cases, did not explain its decision.
“It’s a little difficult to identify a consistent approach,” said Eric Berger, a law professor at the University of Nebraska. “This Department of Justice is much more reluctant to use the death penalty, especially than the Trump administration, and is much more aware of the death penalty. of the problems, but the country is not prepared to abolish the death penalty completely.”
Under Garland, the Justice Department has reversed more than 20 decisions seeking the death penalty, including for alleged gang members charged in the deaths of two teenagers in New York. Garland has authorized the continuation of just two death penalty cases he inherited, including another mass shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue motivated by hate.
Robert Bowers was sentenced to death in August for carrying out the deadliest anti-Semitic attack in US history when he shot and killed 11 worshipers in 2018. The other case was against Sayfullo Saipov, a 35-year-old Islamic extremist convicted of maniacally racing a truck. along a popular bike path in New York City, killing eight people and maiming others. Due to divisions among the jury members, he was not sentenced to death.
In Buffalo, 20-year-old Payton Gendron pleaded guilty to crossing the state to attack a majority-black neighborhood and carrying out the attack with a semi-automatic weapon marked with racial slurs and phrases, including “The Great Replacement ‘, a reference to a conspiracy theory that there is a plot to reduce the influence of white people.
“It’s a mass shooting, and mass shootings have only increased and gotten worse over the years. It was also racially motivated, and that seems to be a big factor here,” said Deborah Denno, a law professor at Fordham University who studies the death penalty. “Garland is more or less indicating what he considers important, what would prompt him to seek the death penalty.”
In the changes made under Garland, the Justice Department manual directs prosecutors to give more weight to cases that do the most harm to the country.
Yet the department chose not to enforce the death penalty in another racist mass shooting targeting Hispanic people that left 23 people dead at a Wal-Mart in El Paso. In that case, 24-year-old gunman Patrick Crusius was diagnosed with a serious mental illness, which may have played a role.
There is no public evidence of mental illness in the Gendron case so far. But courts are increasingly questioning harsh sentences for young defendants amid new research into brain development, said Robin Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center. Gendron also pleaded guilty and expressed “sincere remorse” and was sentenced to multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole, she said.
“This federal trial will be lengthy and cost taxpayers millions of dollars in pursuit of the exact same outcome today, which is that Mr. Gendron will die in prison,” Bedard said.
Legal Defense Fund President Janai Nelson condemned the decision, saying the history of the death penalty is rife with racial discrimination. “Justice for the many Black people killed in this horrific attack does not begin with pursuing the death penalty,” she said. “In times of extreme violence, we cannot resort to the death penalty as a solution.”
Opponents of the death penalty have long argued that Biden has done little to fulfill his campaign promise and want him to commute the sentences of those on federal death row. During his presidency, the Justice Department fought vigorously in courts to uphold the sentences of death row inmates, according to an Associated Press review of dozens of found legal documents. And while the moratorium on federal executions that Garland announced in 2021 means that no federal prisoners will be put to death while it is in effect, there are no public signs that a review of execution policy that he simultaneously ordered is nearing completion .
In Buffalo, victims’ relatives expressed differing feelings about whether they thought prosecutors should seek the death penalty. The death penalty decision-making process calls for a lengthy investigation, involving the U.S. attorney overseeing the case and a review board.
“Garland is extremely demanding and meticulous, impartial and careful,” Berger said. “Whether or not you agree with his final decision, he will follow the process exactly by the book.”