Newsom's mass death-row clemency is a landmark move that the California Supreme Court should quickly complete by approving the remaining commutations
Source: Austin Sarat. "What Gavin Newsom’s clemency will do for America’s death penalty.." November 5, 2026. slate.com
The Gist
Newsom spared all 548 people on California's death row, which is bigger than any similar move before it and fits a national pattern of governors using clemency. The California Supreme Court still has to sign off on some of them, but its job is only to check for abuse of power, and the author says there's none, so it should approve quickly.
Conclusion
The California Supreme Court should expeditiously approve the commutations of the 548 death-sentenced people with multiple felony convictions, thereby completing Newsom's clemency and moving California and the U.S. closer to ending capital punishment.
Premises
- Newsom's grant of clemency to 548 people is unprecedented in scale and reflects a broader trend, since governors in 24 states have granted capital clemency 327 times since 1977.
- Newsom's reasons are compelling: the death penalty is unfair, unjust, wasteful and protracted, unevenly applied against people of color, people with mental disabilities and the poor, and has sentenced innocent people to death. Other governors who granted mass clemency cited similar concerns.
- Under the California Constitution, the state Supreme Court must approve commutations for people with multiple felony convictions, but its role is narrow: it asks only whether the governor abused his authority (e.g., through corruption or conflict of interest), not whether each applicant deserves clemency.
- The court has long held the governor's clemency power to be 'virtually unlimited' and has regularly approved recent gubernatorial clemency decisions, including commutations of sentences of life without parole.
- Commuting only some death sentences would worsen the systemic injustices Newsom seeks to address, so universal clemency based on systemic factors is more appropriate than case-by-case clemency (per the defense agencies' amicus brief).
Assumptions
- Newsom's grants do not involve corruption, conflict of interest, or other abuse of power that would justify court rejection.
- The court will adhere to its precedent and its narrow, deferential reading of Article V, Section 8.
- The systemic flaws Newsom cites (racial bias, wrongful convictions, cost) are real and are legitimate grounds for clemency.
- Systemic flaws justify blanket clemency rather than individualized review.
- Ending capital punishment is a desirable goal.
- Newsom's action will influence other states' trajectory on the death penalty.