HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Two very different execut...

Sun Mar 31, 2019, 09:09 AM

Two very different executions show the Supreme Court's anti-blackness and Islamophobia

If there were any lingering doubts about the Supreme Court’s anti-blackness and Islamophobia, the recent decision to stay the execution of a Texas man who was denied a Buddhist spiritual adviser should put them to rest.

The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday to grant a stay on the execution of Patrick Henry Murphy unless the state permits his Buddhist spiritual adviser to be in the execution room with him.

In contrast, last month, when Alabama death row prisoner Domineque Ray, a black Muslim, appealed for a stay on his execution because the Alabama Department of Corrections would not allow him to have an Imam present in the death chamber, the Supreme Court vacated his appeal. Ray was later executed with his Imam viewing his death from an adjacent room.


Moreover, what the two cases in contrast reveal, is that the issue of “process” and “procedure” used to deny Ray of a spiritual adviser in the death chamber was nothing more than a thinly-veiled disguise to the overt anti-blackness and Islamophobia at play. That’s why SCOTUS could unabashedly state in Murphy’s case that, “The State may not carry out Murphy’s execution pending the timely filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari unless the State permits Murphy’s Buddhist spiritual advisor or another Buddhist reverend of the State’s choosing to accompany Murphy in the execution chamber during the execution.”


Systemic and systematic...

2 replies, 476 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 2 replies Author Time Post
Reply Two very different executions show the Supreme Court's anti-blackness and Islamophobia (Original post)
Soph0571 Mar 2019 OP
TreasonousBastard Mar 2019 #1
ck4829 Mar 2019 #2

Response to Soph0571 (Original post)

Sun Mar 31, 2019, 09:45 AM

1. Maybe, but...


Several points made in this article, not the least that the Supremes dragged this case up before the full circuit court could hear it.

But, the Alabama prison reasoning was essentially that only the prison chaplain was allowed in and was supposed to, like military chaplains, take care of all religious beliefs. You couldn't ask for your own parish priest or rabbi, either. Don't even think about a wiccan.

You could argue that this is bullshit, but it does make the situation less clear. And it's not clear if Texas had the same rules denying your own spiritual advisor

I do, however, have little doubt that the majority on the Court used the Scalia excuse of late filing to make it go away.

The chaplain was allowed to be present, the officials went on, because he was an employee of the prison system who was “a member of the execution team” and was “familiar with the technicalities of the execution protocol,” having attended almost every execution in the state since 1997. The chaplain kneels and prays with inmates who seek pastoral care, the officials said. After considering Mr. Ray’s request, prison officials agreed to exclude the chaplain. But they said allowing the imam to be present raised unacceptable safety concerns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Soph0571 (Original post)

Sun Mar 31, 2019, 02:00 PM

2. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread