Oregon

  • December 12, 2011

    by Jeremy Leaming

    Advocates for repealing the death penalty say there are hopeful signs that 2012 will see great progress toward their goal, Politico reports.

    Efforts are underway in California, Kansas, Ohio, Maryland and Connecticut to dump the use of the death penalty. Politico notes, “Advocates say the coming year could be their best opportunity yet to replace the death penalty with life without the possibility of parole in these states, pointing to shifts in public opinion, rising concern over execution costs, Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber’s recent decision to place a moratorium on capital punishment, and Troy Davis’s high-profile execution galvanizing opposition to the death penalty.”

    Diann Rust-Tierney, head of the National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty, told Politico that Davis’s case helped spark greater attention to how states employ capital punishment. “That was a sad but stark example to folks of how broken the system is,” Rust-Tierney said.

    Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said, “Any of those [state efforts] could succeed, but they’re all teed up for this coming year."

    As Politico notes, the SAFE California Campaign, which is working to place an initiative before voters next year to abolish the death penalty, has cited the enormous costs – in the billions – of carrying out the death penalty in a state burdened with significant budgetary woes .  

    In a Dec. 2 guest post for ACSblog, Andrew Love, a death penalty lawyer in California, noted, “A study released by U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Arthur L. Alarcon found that California’s death penalty system is currently costing the state about $184 million per year. Further, ‘since reinstating the death penalty in 1978, California taxpayers have spent roughly $4 billion to fund a dysfunctional death penalty system that has carried out no more than 13 executions.'"

  • January 12, 2010
    Guest Post

    By Rajdeep Singh, Director of Law and Policy at The Sikh Coalition

    In February 2010, the Oregon legislature will have a historic opportunity to repeal ORS 342.650, a state law that forbids public school teachers from wearing religious dress in the classroom.

    According to press reports and historical literature published by the State of Oregon about its own history, ORS 342.650 originated in the 1920s as an anti-Catholic measure and was supported by the Ku Klux Klan at a time of overt hostility toward racial and religious minorities. Other laws enacted by the Oregon legislature during this period included the Compulsory Education Act (a measure designed to close parochial schools) and the Alien Property Act of 1923 (a law that prohibited Japanese immigrants from purchasing or leasing land in Oregon). Although two of these laws have since been repealed, ORS 342.650 is still enforced against religious minorities, including observant Sikhs who wear dastaars (turbans); observant Muslims who wear hijabs (headscarves); and observant Jews who wear yarmulkes (headcoverings).

    Although some supporters of the status quo argue that ORS 342.650 protects students from religious indoctrination, Oregon appears to be one of only three states in the country (including Nebraska and Pennsylvania) that continue to impose such stringent restrictions on public school teachers. This is prima facie evidence that ORS 342.650 is a ‘blunt instrument' and that a less restrictive balance can be struck between the state's interest in promoting religious neutrality and its obligation to protect civil rights. The case for repealing it was bolstered last November when two key state agencies-Oregon's Bureau of Labor and Industries, and the Oregon Department of Education-issued a joint memorandum urging repeal.