Series: The Advocates
Episode: 313
Original Link: https://americanarchive.org/catalog/cpb-aacip-15-2r3nv9997h
Episode Summary:
This episode of The Advocates debated whether states should restore the death penalty in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision deeming existing statutes unconstitutional for being applied in a “wantonly and freakishly” arbitrary manner. Advocate William Rusher and his witnesses—including Florida Attorney General Robert Shevin and philosopher Rev. Bruce Williams—argued in favor of restoration, contending that the death penalty serves retributive justice, demonstrates the seriousness with which society regards murder, and deters especially heinous crimes like premeditated murder or the killing of police or prison guards by those already serving life sentences. They maintained that with properly designed legislation—such as mandatory sentences for well-defined crimes—the penalty could be applied uniformly and justly, satisfying the Court’s objections.
Opposing restoration, Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz and his witnesses—including Pennsylvania Attorney General Shane Creamer and psychiatrist Dr. Louis West—argued that the death penalty is both unnecessary and fundamentally flawed. They cited authoritative studies showing no deterrent effect on murder rates, pointed to states with the highest execution rates also having the most murders, and highlighted the racial and socioeconomic disparities in its application. Opponents contended that abolishing the death penalty has not led to increased crime and that life imprisonment fully protects society without risking wrongful execution, exacerbating social inequality, or diverting resources away from needed criminal justice reforms.
The debate ultimately contrasted philosophical arguments about retribution and moral principle with empirical evidence and concerns about fairness and error. The proponents insisted society must uphold its deepest values with ultimate penalties for the most grievous crimes; the opponents responded that compassion, the prevention of irreversible mistakes, and a more just criminal system demand abolition. The audience and viewers were invited to vote and share their views in what was portrayed as a crucial, highly contested issue facing every state.
