Commutation Outrage

    In the latest in a long series of shameful closing acts, President Biden, not long ago, commuted the sentences of 37 of the 40 murderers on federal death row. Biden’s midnight decision spared the lives of all but the three most notorious capital inmates: the Tree of Life Synagogue shooter, the Emmanuel AME Church shooter, and the surviving Boston Marathon bomber.

    In his statement on the commutations, Biden said he was “more convinced than ever that we must stop the use of the death penalty at the federal level.” It’s clear, then, that he only stopped short of a blanket commutation because of the backlash that would have come with pardoning these three mass murderers.

    Make no mistake: Biden’s choice to spare the remaining 37 murderers is a moral travesty. In doing so, the lame duck president has once again shown that he is more beholden to progressive dogmas than to the pursuit of justice. That’s obvious when you look at the killers Biden spared. Take Daniel Troya and Ricardo Sanchez, Jr., who murdered a family of four in cold blood, including three-year-old Luis Damian Escobedo and four-year-old Luis Julian Escobedo. Or consider Jorge Avila-Torrez, who murdered eight-year-old Laura Hobbs and nine-year-old Krystal Tobias in 2005. Avila-Torrez then joined the Marines, strangled U.S. Navy petty officer Amanda Jean Snell to death, and abducted and assaulted two more women before finally being apprehended.

    Nine of those with commuted sentences were on death row for killing other people in prison. If capital punishment is not an option for such offenses, then there is no moral or state-sanctioned vengeance for prison homicides—and therefore no guarantee of safety for the incarcerated. And as I have stated before in this space, incarceration, let alone the ultimate retribution is not a rehabilitative endeavor. It is punishment. It is vengeance. Because the law means nothing, without the idea of vengeance.

    Just because these cases were not high-profile does not mean that the crimes were not monstrous. The death penalty is handed out sparingly in the United States; in 2023, just 21 new capital sentences were imposed nationwide. When it is applied, it is done for important reasons.

    But none of this matters to the progressive pro-crime groups that pressured Biden into the pardon. Indeed, the ACLU cheered the news, calling it a “historic and courageous step” toward “outlawing the barbaric practice once again.”

    Under the confused moral theory of death-penalty abolitionists, taking the life of someone who murders children is “barbaric.” Where, one might ask, were their condemnations of the murders in the first place? The answer, of course, is that they regard the lives of criminals as more worthy of their attention than the lives of the innocent.

    This same lawless attitude is what drove Biden’s earlier mass commutation of 1,500 federal inmates serving time in home confinement under a COVID-era program. Those now walking free thanks to Biden include pill-mill doctors and a judge who made $2.1 million in kickbacks for locking up children in juvenile detention.

    Both commutations were motivated by the idea that the criminal justice system, and punishment itself, are bad. A consideration that heinous criminals deserve to be punished appears nowhere in that calculus.

    Fortunately, the American public disagrees. And while the American public is not the final arbiter in a representative democracy (as we do not make the laws, we elect those who make and interpret the laws), it is important that the American political climate be measured by those we elect. According to most polls, Americans believe the death penalty is morally justified, and majorities have consistently endorsed its use for murderers. They know that some crimes are so monstrous as to deserve the ultimate retribution. 

    Look, I know that to some of you this essay may seem just a tad hypocritical. I mean, not long ago, I wrote a piece that, while not coming around to a full, anti-death penalty stance, took a much more, shall we say, nuanced view of capital punishment. I am increasingly concerned, as I think anyone should be, when the wrong person receives the ultimate punishment. I won’t repeat my argument in this space, but feel free to read that piece here. 

    Biden’s mockery (and whether it is his mockery, or his minions’ due to his increasing mental deficiencies, is irrelevant to me) must become an opportunity to renew our collective commitment to serving justice, or at the very least, making sure our idea of the ultimate justice is in sync with our technological prowess.

Write to Peter: magtour@icloud.com