Church leaders praise Supreme Court ban of juvenile executions
|
The U.S. Supreme Court |
United
Methodists in Iowa are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review a lower
court�s decision that a church can be sued for using the term �the
spirit of Satan.� The Supreme Court, at One First St. N.E. in
Washington, begins and ends its one-year term on the first Monday in
October. About 8,000 petitions are filed in a term, along with more than
1,200 additional applications that can be acted upon by a single
justice. A UMNS photo by Franz Jantzen, Collection of the Supreme Court
of the United States. Editors note: mandatory credit, Franz Jantzen,
Collection of the Supreme Court of the United States. Photo number
03-294, Accompanies UMNS #432, 9/11/03 |
March 2, 2005 A UMNS Report By Marta W. Aldrich* Welcoming
new opportunities for justice that seek restoration over vengeance,
United Methodist leaders lauded the U.S. Supreme Court for outlawing the
execution of juvenile criminals. The
March 1 ruling, they said, reflects a shift in both public and judicial
sentiment about the fairness of capital punishment in general. Noting
the United Methodist Church strongly opposes the death penalty in all
circumstances, they called on the court to ban all executions in the
United States. “I
thank God that the Supreme Court … has at long last ruled against the
execution of persons under the age of 18,” said the Rev. R. Randy Day,
the top mission executive of the United Methodist Church. “(We
encourage) … guidance that will lead young people away from violence
and crime, but we do not turn our backs on those who commit criminal
acts, including murder,” said Day, who leads the United Methodist Board
of Global Ministries, which prioritizes ministries to children and young
people worldwide. “The Bible and the church teach love, forgiveness and
the opportunity for restoration even in cases of the worst offenders.” The
high court’s 5-4 decision overturns a 1989 ruling and throws out the
death sentences of 72 murderers who committed their crimes as juveniles.
Nineteen states had allowed juvenile executions but only three –
Oklahoma, Texas and Virginia – had carried them out in the past decade. The
Supreme Court ruling is the second in recent years to narrow the scope
of the death penalty in the United States. A 2002 decision blocked the
execution of mentally retarded persons found guilty of capital crimes. “The
pendulum has definitely begun to swing against the death penalty,” said
Jim Winkler, chief executive of the United Methodist Board of Church
and Society, the denomination’s social advocacy agency. Winkler
cited growing concerns that innocent people are on death row, fueled by
accounts of condemned inmates who were later exonerated. He noted
studies that indicate the punishment has been applied in a racist or
elitist manner.
|
Photo illustration by Mike DuBoseBefore the U.S. Supreme Court's March 1 ruling, 19 states allowed juvenile executions. |
A
March 1 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court bars the execution of anyone
convicted of a capital crime committed before age 18. The 5-4 decision
could affect some 70 people on death rows across the United States. A
UMNS photo illustration by Mike DuBose. Photo #05-198. Accompanies UMNS
story #130, 3/2/05 |
“The death penalty is too flawed,” he said. “People are feeling a real uneasiness about it.” Writing
on behalf of the majority, Justice Anthony Kennedy cited new scientific
research suggesting that teenage offenders cannot be held as
responsible as adults for their crimes. He noted the United States was
among only a handful of nations that continued to sanction juvenile
executions. “It
is proper that we acknowledge the overwhelming weight of international
opinion against the juvenile death penalty, resting in large part on the
understanding that the instability and emotional imbalance of young
people may often be a factor in a crime,” Kennedy wrote. Since 1990, the United States has accounted for almost half of the world’s 39 known executions of child offenders. “It’s just savagery, really,” Winkler told United Methodist News Service. Prominent leaders in the international human rights movement concurred. William
F. Schulz, executive director of Amnesty International USA, said in a
statement that the court’s ruling “repudiated the misguided idea that
the United States can pledge to leave no child behind while
simultaneously exiling children to the death chamber.” Former
President Jimmy Carter, who filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the
case in 2004, said in a statement the ruling “acknowledges the profound
inconsistency in prohibiting those under 18 years of age from voting,
serving in the military or buying cigarettes, while allowing them to be
sentenced to the ultimate punishment.” In its Book of Discipline,
the United Methodist Church opposes the death penalty in all
circumstances and declares that “all human life is sacred and created by
God.” “We believe the death penalty denies the power of Christ to redeem, restore and transform all human beings,” it says. Harmon
Wray, who once headed the denomination’s restorative justice office,
welcomed the ruling as an opportunity to better explore alternative
forms of punishment – such as restorative justice – which he says are
more consistent with the ministry of Jesus Christ and the teachings of
the Gospel. Restorative
justice brings together the victim, offender and local community to
determine an appropriate response to the crime. “It’s when crime is
understood as a violation of another human being, not just breaking the
law,” said Wray, who has worked on criminal justice concerns for 32
years. “It
defines accountability not as passively taking punishment but actively
taking responsibility and trying to make amends,” he said. “It amounts
to a focus on repairing the harm rather than seeking vengeance and a
punitive response.” *Aldrich is a freelance writer in Franklin, Tenn. News media contact: Tim Tanton, (615) 742-5470 or newsdesk@umcom.org.
|