New Jersey Abolishes Death Penalty: The World Takes Note

If you are looking for evidence that a) the world is paying attention to death penalty practices in the United States, and b) states in this country are active participants in the international human rights system, this week’s vote by the New Jersey state legislature to abolish the death penalty is a great example.

Today’s NY Times editorial framed the issues in global terms:

Whatever the motivation of individual legislators, by forsaking a barbaric practice that grievously hurts the global reputation of the United States without advancing public safety, New Jersey has set a worthy example for the federal government, and for other states that have yet to abandon the creaky, error-prone machinery of death.
(snip)
By clinging to the death penalty, states keep themselves in the company of countries like Iran, North Korea and China — a disreputable pantheon of human mistreatment. Small wonder the gyrations of New Jersey’s Legislature have been watched intently by human rights activists around the world.

It is interesting that the Times is measuring the practice of NJ not against other states in the U.S., but against the practices of foreign states. The question is not, “Do you want to be like Texas?” but rather, “Do you and Texas want to be like Iran?” In the global marketplace for capital and brainpower, reputation matters. And the governor of NJ is both an ardent capitalist and a death penalty opponent. By winning over those legislators who think about the death penalty as a practical issue (it has monetary costs in addition to reputational costs), Governor Corzine has created an important coalition of moral and political support for abolition. And he has done so even in the face of stated popular support and a renewed claims that the death penalty has a measurable deterrent effect on homicides.

As I have argued here, the international movement toward abolition of the death penalty has had an important effect — along with the rise of DNA evidence, state investigations into death penalty practices and increasing wariness of juries to impose capital punishment — on the steady decline in death sentences and the carrying out of executions in the U.S. And the transnational norm entrepreneurs engaged in this effort are rightfully claiming a victory in New Jersey.

Not surprisingly, news of the ban is getting considerable coverage in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canadian and European press. (I’d be interested to hear from readers in Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East about whether and how the press is covering the story in those places.) In the non-English-speaking media, I noticed this piece on the Deutsche-Welle site noting that, after the NJ ban, the death penalty remains on the books in 36 states, and this article by AFP which details the steady decline in executions in the U.S. since the late 1990s and the dates and circumstances of death penalty bans in other U.S. states.

Among the global political reaction to New Jersey’s decision: Words of appreciation from the CDU/CSU (social conservative) party in Germany; a statement by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe that he is“delighted” by the NJ decision and predicts accelaration of bans in other U.S. states; and, a deicion in Rome to illuminate the Colosseumin support of the NJ decision.

The world is also watching closely the case in which the U.S. Supreme Court is taking up the legality of lethal injection. Are we at a tipping point on the death penalty in the U.S.?