WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Merrick Garland’s decision to seek the death penalty for a white supremacist who killed 10 Black people at a Buffalo supermarket marks a shift in the Justice Department’s approach to capital punishment. This comes after Garland imposed a moratorium on federal executions early in his term and the administration’s pledge to abolish the death penalty. This case represents the first new capital prosecution approved by Garland and highlights the complexities and shift in approach towards the death penalty in the U.S.
President Joe Biden campaigned on a promise to abolish the death penalty, however, he has taken few concrete steps to do so. Under Garland’s leadership, the Justice Department has significantly pulled back on the use of capital punishment, reversing more than two dozen decisions to seek the death penalty. Despite this, the department has shown a continued willingness to use it in certain cases, highlighting the inconsistent approach towards the issue.
In the case of Payton Gendron, who drove across the state to target a largely Black neighborhood and carried out a racially motivated attack, Garland’s decision to seek the death penalty signals what he deems important in asking for such a punishment. While the federal trial is expected to be lengthy and costly, Gendron has already been sentenced to multiple life sentences without the possibility of parole, raising questions about the purpose and necessity of pursuing the death penalty in this case.
The decision to seek the death penalty in the Buffalo case has faced criticism, with opponents of the death penalty pointing to its history of racial discrimination and advocating for alternative forms of justice. Additionally, the administration’s approach to maintaining the sentences of death row inmates has been in question, as there have been no public signs of a review of execution policies ordered by Garland.
Despite the administration’s stance on the death penalty and Garland’s meticulous and nonpartisan approach, the decision to seek capital punishment for Gendron has reignited the discussion on the effectiveness and morality of the death penalty in the United States. As the case progresses, it will continue to shed light on the complexities and contradictions surrounding the issue. Ultimately, the pursuit of the death penalty in this case mirrors a broader shift in approach under the current administration.