Prosecutors in the Aurora theater shooting case have delivered a lengthy defense of capital punishment in a series of responses to arguments that Colorado’s death penalty system is unconstitutional.

The responses, filed last week but made public Tuesday, rebuff defense claims that Colorado’s death penalty laws are arbitrary or result in cruel and unusual treatment. Instead, prosecutors say Colorado’s laws combined with their own vetting of potential death penalty cases result in the death penalty being sought in only the worst of the worst murders in the state.

“What the defendant characterizes as arbitrary is the appropriate and constitutional exercise of discretion by the prosecution,” Rich Orman, a senior deputy DA with the 18th Judicial District attorney’s office, wrote.

Orman also rejected arguments that his own office is overeager to pursue the death penalty. The 18th Judicial District attorney’s office prosecuted all three killers on Colorado’s death row and is also seeking the death penalty in two ongoing cases, including the one against Aurora theater shooter James Holmes.

“Prosecutors cannot choose the murderers that commit crimes in their jurisdictions,” Orman wrote.

Last month, lawyers for Holmes filed multiple motions contesting the constitutionality of Colorado’s death penalty system. Among their most detailed challenges is an argument that the death penalty in Colorado could be used so frequently — but is in fact sought so infrequently — that its use is unconstitutionally arbitrary.