Newsom Expected to Appoint a Death Penalty Opponent to Attorney General

Governor Gavin Newsom will soon be appointing a new attorney general of California. In a LA Times article yesterday Patrick McGreevy stated, “…he is preparing to appoint a state attorney general from a field of potential candidates that includes some of the state’s leading critics of the death penalty.” The concern here is that the death penalty will not be applied to those individuals who commit heinous violent crimes when it remains a legal and protected means of sentencing under the California state constitution. 

In yesterday’s article Adam B. Schiff was quoted, “I have always believed that this most severe of sanctions does deter some criminals from the callous taking of a human life.” Schiff made this statement when he ran for state Senate in 1996. The appointing of an attorney general who adamantly and publicly opposes the death penalty raises concerns that the discretion allotted in that role could allow the AG to make a decision that is not in-line with the current state laws in regards to the death penalty. Schiff has made a shift from is previous stance in support of the death penalty to supporting Newsom’s moratorium on the issue of executions as of yesterday according to a spokesperson. Does this mean Schiff is considering changing his stance in hope of being considered for the AG appointment?

Among the candidates for AG are two district attorneys who strongly oppose the death penalty, Diana Becton from Contra Costa County and Jeff Rosen from Santa Clara County. Both Becton and Rosen signed a amicus brief which stated, “[prosecutors] believe that death sentences are arbitrarily imposed under current California death penalty statues.” It appears clear that Gov. Newsom is only taking serious consideration for the AG position from those who oppose the death penalty and support his views on executions.  CJLF Legal Director Kent Scheidegger told the Times, “In my opinion, it’s highly improper for the attorney general to refuse to defend a judgment that is legal and valid simply because he disagrees with the law as a matter of policy. That doesn’t mean he can’t do it.”

What other policy positions will Gov. Newsom be looking for in the new AG?