The question of whether we, as a nation, should have the death penalty is often framed around whether or not a particular defendant deserves to die. As prominent scholars in this field have pointed out, the real question may be:

Do we, as a society, deserve to kill? Does our collective commitment to equity, justice, accuracy and understanding allow for the imposition of the ultimate punishment for which there can be no margin of error? Or, instead, are we willing to tolerate a system that is inevitably influenced by race and poverty and cling to the archaic use of excess punishment and legalized vengeance instead of providing those in need with services and rehabilitation?



In the Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision on June 29 to uphold the use of a questionable execution protocol in Oklahoma, virtually all of the justices in the majority and concurring opinions referenced the question of whether the defendant deserved to die (reaching varied conclusions).

However, the Court’s rendered opinion in Glossip v. Gross also makes clearer than ever before that we, as a society, do not deserve to kill.