« Pondering Eighth Amendment issues around new capital child rape statutes at Sentencing Matters Substack | Main | US Sentencing Commission seeks comment on policy priorities for 2025-26 guideline amendment cycle »
June 9, 2025
Another week with a notable number of executions scheduled in the US
This new CNN article, headlined "4 executions are scheduled in 4 states over four days this week. Here’s what we know," highlights both upcoming executions and broader capital punishment trendis in the United States this year. Here are excerpts:
Over the next four days, four inmates in four states are scheduled to be put to death – a cluster that, while not abnormal, comes amid a national uptick in executions as President Donald Trump calls for the death penalty’s expansion.
The executions are slated to begin Tuesday, when Alabama is scheduled to put Gregory Hunt to death for the murder of Karen Lane. On the same day, Florida plans to execute Anthony Wainwright for the murder of Carmen Gayheart. On Thursday, Oklahoma says it will execute John Hanson for the murder of Mary Agnes Bowles. And a day later, Stephen Stanko is scheduled to be put to death in South Carolina for the murder of Henry Lee Turner....
[E]xecutions are up in the first half of 2025 compared to recent years. In addition to this week’s, two more are scheduled later in June. If all six proceed as planned, it would mark 25 executions this year to date, matching the total number of executions carried out in 2024, according to data from the Death Penalty Information Center. That would be the highest number of executions carried out through June since 2011....
States are acting independently. But their moves come as Trump has signaled a desire to see capital punishment used more often at the federal level, saying he wants to deter criminals and protect the American people. While his day one executive order, “Restoring the Death Penalty and Protecting Public Safety,” does not apply to the states, experts said the message it sends could encourage state officials who want to align themselves with the president.
“If a state is inclined to conduct executions anyway, Trump’s rhetoric would be the wind behind them pushing them to do that,” said Corinna Lain, a University of Richmond law professor and author of “Secrets of the Killing State: The Untold Story of Lethal Injection.”
June 9, 2025 at 10:58 AM | Permalink
Comments
I remember thinking "no way" when there was one of these earlier this year, but they did in fact go ahead.
Posted by: Soronel Haetir | Jun 9, 2025 9:09:31 PM
Fry them all.
Posted by: federalist | Jun 10, 2025 4:07:29 PM
Yeah, if they wanted to crime with impunity, they should have stormed the U.S. Capitol while a Presidential election was being certified or something.
Posted by: Frank Fosdick | Jun 11, 2025 4:52:31 AM
It is so funny to me. People like FF cosplay as concerned citizens, just wanting all of our rights to be adhered to, but then exults at the prosecutions of those who were waved into the Capitol and walked around and then left.
Posted by: federalist | Jun 11, 2025 9:23:15 AM
Yup, if they wanted to do crime with impunity, they should be Joe Biden's kid.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Jun 11, 2025 10:50:28 AM
Frank,
You are such a predictable, insincere, and useless partisan hack.
Why not use the LA riots as a more recent (current) example? It has it all. Fires, looting, throwing Molotov cocktails at cops/federal agents, etc. The biggest difference being that Pelosi is not there to turn away help from the National Guard.
But, unfortunately, it doesn’t fit your partisan bent so you have to ignore it.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Jun 11, 2025 11:59:54 AM
federalist,
It's going to take far broader and more fundamental reform of the flaws in U.S. governance to produce "exultation" in me.
As regards the January 6th insurrectionists, I note that (1) they were (and are) people under the jurisdiction of the United States, and got more due process than your hero Trump has been extending to most immigrants this year, regardless of how orderly their paperwork has been.
And (2) you may not like the results, as the coup failed, but let's not pretend that it was anything but an attempted usurpation.
Posted by: Frank Fosdick | Jun 11, 2025 12:05:49 PM
The coup did not fail, as Joe Biden was installed as president in 2021. What gives you say? Well, we had government misinformation plus Biden campaign collusion. What I am referring to is the government suppression of the Hunter laptop story. Antony Blinken (a Biden campaign operative) arranged for the CIA to approve, in record time, the 51 intel pros letter suggesting that the laptop was Russian disinformation. That rendered the election fundamentally unfair, and that unfairness can be charged to the Biden campaign. Biden, to his everlasting shame, lied through his teeth in the first 2020 campaign debate (after having procured the cover through his campaign.) On top of that, the Democrats engaged in collusive suits to undercut ballot integrity laws. This almost certainly tipped the election to Biden. And you're trying to argue that Trump couldn't fight fire with fire?
And as for the J6 peeps, how about all the lengthy pre-trial confinement for a trespassing case? You good with that, or are you just cosplaying?
Finally, as for illegals like Kilmar, they can stay with you. The fact is that Judge Xinis is a criminal-loving hack. The Trump Administration was completely free to wink wink nod nod "ask" Bukele. Bukele said no. The Administration was required to nothing more. It's funny. Your guy imports millions of illegals, and we have to then give full-blown DP to all of them. Nope.
Posted by: federalist | Jun 11, 2025 5:17:34 PM
TQ,
It appears that my partisanship doesn't hold a candle to yours, which fails to meet the Bill Otis challenge of voicing full-throated condemnation of criminality at (almost) every turn. (Being a member in good standing of the Federalist Society, Bill practices and expects disregard of law-breaking by Republican activists and politicians.)
"Why not use the LA riots as a more recent (current) example?"
Of what? Unlike the attempted coup on January 6, more than a handful of people are being arrested on the scene--hundreds of them, according to the LAPD. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn7z45pyrvvo
I'll predict right now that Gavin Newsom will not issue a blanket pardon to all of these people, in contrast to your Maximum Leader Donald J. Trump with his Capitol brownshirt wannabes. If my prediction fails, feel free to remind me of it. (If it's borne out, I know better than to expect any even vaguely conservative person to acknowledge the fact.)
I think Newsom's eyeing a White House run in 2028: he's not going to leave his right flank exposed by being "soft" on crime/protestors/civil rights activists. Like most of the Democratic Party's elected officials, he knows the playbook for a successful 1992 presidential campaign and he's going to run it methodically. Your side will do its part by hyperventilating about how radically, unprecedentedly extremist that 30-year-old program is, and the billionaire donors who control the DNC will maintain the campaign's message discipline just as they did with Kamala Harris. ("She did suggest a crackdown on corporate price-gouging, but was mostly dissuaded from touting such corporate-oversight policy planks by her brother-in-law, who took leave from his job as an Uber executive to advise her campaign." https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/11/joe-biden-kamala-harris-economy-vibes-inflation-unemployment.html )
Give James Carville a hug when you see him. He's your dance partner even if you don't know it.
Posted by: Frank Fosdick | Jun 12, 2025 5:57:28 AM
Frank Fosdick --
"Being a member in good standing of the Federalist Society, Bill practices and expects disregard of law-breaking by Republican activists and politicians."
What a breathtaking liar you are. Below is what I said word-for word while the Jan. 6 riot was still underway:
Acting AG Rosen Must Bring the Full Weight of the Law Against Today’s Violence at the Capitol
by Bill Otis · Published Jan 6, 2021 1:14 pm · Updated Jan 6, 2021 1:26 pm
Numerous reports say that pro-Trump protesters have invaded the Capitol to make it impossible for Vice President Pence (who has been evacuated) to count the electoral votes. One woman has been shot, although the specific circumstances are unclear at this hour.
This is intolerable. If the rule of law means anything, it means that we forswear violence and intimidation in favor of peaceful persuasion and legal process. I understand that many on Trump’s side feel urgently, and not entirely without basis, that the election was infected with fraud. But adherence to law is so hard precisely because its value is so great: It demands that we restrain even our most urgent feelings in favor of peaceful (though often maddening) process. The alternative to the rule of law is the rule of the jungle.
The upshot is that Acting AG Rosen must see to it that the full weight of the law be brought against the Capitol invaders. If intimidation and force are not acceptable for BLM and Antifa — and they aren’t — they are not acceptable for anyone else, either. Let the prosecutions begin." ###
Now, Mr. "Fosdick," admit you were lying and apologize.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Jun 12, 2025 3:36:53 PM
FF,
You stated: “ It appears that my partisanship doesn't hold a candle to yours, which fails to meet the Bill Otis challenge of voicing full-throated condemnation of criminality at (almost) every turn.”
Projection, much?
You stated: “ Of what? Unlike the attempted coup on January 6, more than a handful of people are being arrested on the scene--hundreds of them, according to the LAPD.”
What the hell are you talking about? Wasn’t something like 1,500 people arrested for 1/6? That’s not a “handful?” As far as “on the scene,” that’s the call of local law enforcement, not the governor and especially not a POTUS. Let’s not pretend Trump had control of the DC and Capitol Police.
You stated: “ I'll predict right now that Gavin Newsom will not issue a blanket pardon to all of these people, in contrast to your Maximum Leader Donald J. Trump with his Capitol brownshirt wannabes. If my prediction fails, feel free to remind me of it. (If it's borne out, I know better than to expect any even vaguely conservative person to acknowledge the fact.)”
Of course not. Much like the riots of several years ago, it will be taken care of at the time of actual charging the criminals. They will not charge, undercharge, or give them sweetheart plea deals when possible.
We know how this works.
You stated: “ I think Newsom's eyeing a White House run in 2028: he's not going to leave his right flank exposed by being "soft" on crime/protestors/civil rights activists. Like most of the Democratic Party's elected officials, he knows the playbook for a successful 1992 presidential campaign and he's going to run it methodically. Your side will do its part by hyperventilating about how radically, unprecedentedly extremist that 30-year-old program is, and the billionaire donors who control the DNC will maintain the campaign's message discipline just as they did with Kamala Harris.”
He will talk tough and let the liberal DA’s do the dirty work for him. He’s more worried about his LEFT flank than right. His tough talk will be accompanied by a wink and a nod. Just like Obama, Biden, and every Dem POTUS candidate (think candidate Obama with gay marriage issue), they will tell the majority a lie hoping the base knows their real intentions.
You stated “… to your Maximum Leader Donald J. Trump…”
Again, projection. I’ve never been a Trumpster. The 2024 general election was the first time I have ever voted for him, including the primaries. Even then, it was with the taste of bile in my mouth. He was physically alive, unlike Biden, and received more than zero primary votes, unlike Kamala (whose brain is as dead as Biden’s).
If you can come up with a single word indicating my supporting Trump as “[my] Maximum Leader,” I’d love for you to post it. You won’t, because you cannot. You are a one dimensional “all in” person. They are on your “team” or they are not, so you believe everyone else must be equally brain dead.
Fortunately, that’s not true.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Jun 12, 2025 4:08:19 PM
TarlsQtr --
He just says whatever he wants. As both of us have seen, truthfulness is not a requirement. Indeed it's irrelevant. The main criterion is that it be insulting to people who don't agree with his politics.
This blog has a lot of potential, and features a number of smart, experienced and fair-minded commenters, but gets loaded with trash by people of that sort, making it much less appealing than it can be.
P.S. The idea that you're a Trump fan goes beyond being false. To people who follow you, it's hilarious.
Posted by: Bill Otis | Jun 13, 2025 12:04:21 PM
TQ,
"Projection, much?"
A (now defunct) Web forum I frequented some 20 years ago established by inference a rule that the first person to accuse another of projection is the one practicing it. One of the laws of irony or something.
"What the hell are you talking about? Wasn’t something like 1,500 people arrested for 1/6?"
Yes, days, weeks, or months later, cumulatively. That's why I said, "[u]nlike the attempted coup on January 6, more than a handful of people are being arrested on the scene".
That's what the hell I'm talking about. Only a handful of January 6 insurrectionists were arrested on January 6.
"Let’s not pretend Trump had control of the DC and Capitol Police."
You raise an opportunity for a potentially fruitful thought experiment: what would have happened differently on January 6, 2021, if he had?
"[Newsom]'s more worried about his LEFT flank than right."
I predict that the opposite will eventuate, in part because in a nationwide contest he's "Mr. California", and therefore his campaign manager/consultants are sure to tell him that the entire country will presume he's to the left of Bernie Sanders (he's very much not), even without knowing anything else about him. C'mon, low-information voters think gas cars are illegal in California, that they have a state single-payer health care insurance program, a full year of paid parental leave for both (er, I mean "all") genders, free state-funded day care, and no nuclear power plants.[1]
"I’ve never been a Trumpster. The 2024 general election was the first time I have ever voted for him,"
Uh, well, you're one now, then. Was Chase Oliver really so terrible?
"Even then, it was with the taste of bile in my mouth."
You know, you CAN reverse truncate your ballot--or just not vote. Even in Australia, where voting is mandatory, it's perfectly legal (and somewhat popular) to simply scrawl a penis on the ballot paper to express one's displeasure with--well, whatever one likes. https://theconversation.com/why-dick-doodles-on-the-ballot-paper-are-their-own-election-statement-61977
"If you can come up with a single word indicating my supporting Trump as “[my] Maximum Leader,” I’d love for you to post it. You won’t, because you cannot."
I invite you to ventilate your bilious feelings about Trump more often on this blog. It would help prevent unfortunate misconceptions.
"You are a one dimensional “all in” person. They are on your “team” or they are not, so you believe everyone else must be equally brain dead. Fortunately, that’s not true."
I agree that not all people who don't share my politics are brain dead. Some are extremely clever at exploiting and abusing others. Others are excessively credulous.
The Democratic Party of the United States does a bang-up job of being a conservative political party. The worst political problem we have (after FPTP and the drastically undersized House of Representatives--pour one out for the sadly unlamented original First Amendment[2]) is that we tell ourselves that the party isn't conservative.
[1] Their last one, Diablo Canyon (great name for a fission reactor site, guys) WAS scheduled in 2020 to be shut down this year. https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/local/article84993992.html
[2] https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/bill-of-rights-transcript
Posted by: Frank Fosdick | Jun 15, 2025 12:24:43 AM
FF,
You didn’t answer my request.
The rest is just, you might call it, “sophistry.”
I will answer the entire post if/when you give the requested information.
Posted by: TarlsQtr | Jun 15, 2025 12:24:15 PM
TQ,
"You didn’t answer my request."
I didn't realize that "Projection, much?" was an earnest question.
Fine--my response is, "no, I don't think so."
I am confident I would get into plenty of arguments with Democratic or "liberal" commenters on this blog, including Doug Berman, if they afforded me the opportunity. But--assuming arguendo that those terms apply to them--commenters like Beth Curtis, Jon S, Keith Lynch, and even "Da Man"[*]--make comments that tend not to be (a) crass overgeneralizations, (b) outright falsehoods, or (c) ventilations of bigotry. Possibly all of these people are to my right politically, but if they don't strike me as deceptive or obnoxious, I have no bone to pick with them.
Also they tend to be better at staying on topic; the ne plus ultra bannerman of failure in this respect is federalist, who frequently contributes to a thread for the sole purpose of changing the subject,[+] often with a URL to a right-wing news site article that points and gasps about some dastardly deed the damn Democrats are up to, which has nothing obvious to do with the OP, and which he does nothing to topically connect the two.
If your request was for me to cite you celebrating Trump's leadership, I have no evidence to cite. But neither can I recall any occasion where you expressed any criticism of him on this blog--feel free to point me at such. If you've done neither, then the TQ persona on this blog is neutral with respect to DJT. And regarding such passivity, I offer a quote by Samantha Power: "Silence in the face of atrocity is not neutrality; silence in the face of atrocity is acquiescence." (Can we take it as read that Bill Otis finds laughable the idea that any of Trump's actions have constituted atrocities?)
But since I reckon you lend no credence to the aphorisms of an Obama executive branch appointee (she administered--quelle horreur--the now-hated and virtually defunct, DOGE-bitten USAID), I'll offer this one too. "In any compromise between food and poison, only death can win." -- Ayn Rand (ideologically a founding mother of the Libertarian Party, even if she hated it)
I therefore apologize for any insinuation that you are an enthusiastic supporter of Donald Trump. I'll update my characterization of your relation to him as "strident non-opponent". Is that satisfactory?
[*] I don't know if "he da man" or he's a "D.A. Man" of the sort one calls up when observing a long cool woman in a black dress. Also if I had to guess, of the people I picked out of my sorting hat for non-wingnuts, he is I think the least likely to be a registered Democrat, or of "liberal" persuasion. If it's true that he's on Team R, then for the purpose of this blog as a discussion form, he is--to employ a term that still enjoys currency among conservatives--"one of the good ones".
[+] I omit the frequent "roundup" posts from consideration here. Those seem to be this blog's equivalent of "general discussion" threads and I seem to remember Prof. Berman affirmatively welcoming pointers to sentencing-relevant stories he might have missed, especially in reply to those posts, and when those criteria apply, federalist arguably performs a service by offering them.
Posted by: Frank Fosdick | Jun 16, 2025 11:42:11 AM
