Analysis Of Charles Maclean's Argument Against The Death Penalty

511 Words2 Pages

Charles MacLean spends most of his article arguing against the “death is different” jurisprudence which Simmons v. South Carolina began in 1994. MacLean argues that life imprisonment without the possibility of parole is just as racially disparate as the sentence of death. In 2007 Brewer v. Quarterman stated that “No one [should] be at ease with the stark reality that this Court’s [indecisive] pronouncements have produced grossly inequitable treatment of those on death row.” In 2010 Graham v. Florida stated “Today’s decision [deprives] that distinction…‘death is different’ no longer.” MacLean asks the question: “Why should [the “death is different”] debate and the extraordinary capital punishment case procedural safeguards that follow be reserved only for capital punishment cases?” His argument follows, in which he states that a person sentenced to serve the rest of his natural life in prison without possibility of parole will die in prison just like the condemned. The same goes for a person who receives a thirty–year prison sentence, who has suffered a loss of freedom and life. With this in mind, MacLean believes these very serious sentences …show more content…

The study statistically demonstrated that death sentences were disproportionally given based on race. Within the study, race referred to the victim rather than the race of the offender; however, the study highlighted that sentences were given disproportionately and based on an element that had little to do with justice. MacLean states that racial disparity permeates the criminal justice system in ways that affect other severe sentences and is not exclusive to the sentence of death. The article explores racial disparity and racially disparate sentencing in life and death sentences, which MacLean offers as evidence that death is not really that different after

Open Document