“Wild Justice”: A History of the Death Penalty in America

“Wild Justice”: A History of the Death Penalty in America

Last month, NPR’s Fresh Air featured an interview with Evan Mandery, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and a former capital defense attorney, about his new book–A Wild Justice: The Death and Resurrection of Capital Punishment in America. The interview reflected the book’s title, explaining the strange and fascinating history of the death penalty in the United States. From backroom Supreme Court deals to Mandery’s argument that the death penalty is random and lacks deterrent value, this interview is worth a listen for anyone interested in the death penalty or criminal law.

Here is the introduction to the interview:

In the mid-1970s, Arkansas’ electric chair was being used by the prison barber to cut hair, and the execution chamber in New Hampshire was being used to store vegetables. That’s because in 1972, the U.S. Supreme Court shocked the nation by striking down Georgia’s death penalty law, effectively ending executions in the United States. But the decision provoked a strong backlash among those who favored the death penalty, and within four years the high court reversed course and issued a set of rulings that would permit the resumption of executions.

Evan Mandery, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice and a former capital defense attorney, has written a new account of the tumultuous legal and political battles over the death penalty. Mandery is sympathetic to those who tried to outlaw capital punishment, but his account focuses on attorneys for both sides in the battle, as well as the views and deliberations of the justices who decided the cases. His book is called A Wild Justice: The Death and Resurrection of Capital Punishment in America.

A Wild Justice
A Wild Justice

The Death and Resurrection of Capital Punishment in America

by Evan J. Mandery

Is The Two-Party System is Making America Ungovernable?

That was the proposition being debated on the Intelligence Squared podcast. The debate originally occurred in 2011; however, it has a particular relevance today with the government is shutdown and the debt ceiling looming.

Moderated by ABC News’ John Donvan, this debate featured David Brooks–Op-Ed columnist for the New York Times–and Arianna Huffington–Co-Founder and Editor-in-Chief of The Huffington Post, who argued for the motion; and P.J. O’Rourke–H.L. Mencken Research Fellow at the Cato Institute and Zev Chafets–Former columnist, New York City News, who argued against it.

Here is description of the debate:

The Republican and Democratic parties are entrenched in calcified partisanship, where politics is played as a zero-sum game. The rise of the Tea Party, liberal backlash, and the exodus of moderate voices from Congress all point toward the public’s growing discontent. Has our two-party system failed us? Is this a call to change our two-party system of governance?

Mendocino County Marijuana Regulation v. Federal Prohibition

Mendocino County Marijuana Regulation v. Federal Prohibition

 

A recent episode of This American Life discussed the interaction between federal law, which prohibits marijuana growing; California law, which permits it in limited circumstances; and a Mendocino County regulation that attempted to reconcile the two.

 

Here is a description of the story:

 

Under California law, it’s legal to grow marijuana for medicinal purposes if you have a doctor’s recommendation. A few years ago, Mendocino County Sheriff Tom Allman was trying to find a way to deal with the proliferation of marijuana in his county. Allman wanted to spend less time dealing with growers who were growing small, legal amounts, so he could focus on other problems — including criminals who run massive marijuana farms in the Mendocino National Forest. So he came up with a plan to allow the small farmers to grow, if they registered with his office. Growers would pay for little zip-ties they could put around the base of their marijuana plants, and the cops would know to leave them alone. It saved time and generated revenue. Reporter Mary Cuddehe tells the story of how the county and the nation responded to the sheriff’s plan. (18 minutes)

 

NC Voter ID Law Revives Fears of Racial Disenfranchisement

NC Voter ID Law Revives Fears of Racial Disenfranchisement

Recently, NPR’s All Things Considered discussed a new North Carolina voter ID law that some critics fear will make if harder for minorities and the poor to access poling places. 

Here is a description of the story: 

North Carolina’s governor signed a new law requiring a state-approved photo ID to cast a vote in a polling place and shortening the period for early voting. The move comes just weeks after the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated a key provision of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which had required large parts of the state to get federal approval before changing voting laws.

Gov. Pat McCrory, a Republican, says the new law will protect the state from voter fraud.Critics say it reverses crucial reforms designed to help protect the rights of African-Americans, young people and the poor.

NPR’s Ailsa Chang visited rural areas of North Carolina to report on how the changes could affect poor minority voters who live there.

Obamacare: Answers and Explanations

Obamacare: Answers and Explanations

With key parts of the Affordable Care Act going into effect  in less that two months, NPR’s Morning Edition answers some common questions about the Act. 

Here is a description of the segment: 

The Oct. 1 launch of the new health insurance exchanges is now less than two months away, and people are starting to pay attention to the changes these new marketplaces may bring to the nation’s health care system.

We know it’s confusing, so we’re spending part of the summer and fall answering at least some of your questions about the law. You can see earlier pieces in our series here and here.

Today we’re answering questions regarding two of the more frequent topics raised: student health plans and possible penalties for failing to obtain health insurance.