Los Angeles, CA — A California congressman has criticized Governor Gavin Newsom for his suspension of the death penalty, arguing it benefits criminals and undermines justice, particularly in high-profile cases like the murder of a 13-year-old boy in Los Angeles.
U.S. Rep. Kevin Kiley, a Republican, spoke out about the 2019 moratorium following charges against Mario Edgardo Garcia Aquino, who is accused of murdering Oscar Omar Hernandez. Supporters of the death penalty like Kiley argue that its presence acts as a deterrent for severe crimes.
In 2016, California voters rejected Proposition 62, which sought to repeal the death penalty, a decision echoed in the state’s retention of capital punishment through a referendum. Kiley points to this to question the governor’s right to unilaterally suspend executions, claiming it disregards the popular vote.
The congressman also expressed support for L.A. County District Attorney Nathan Hochman, commending his efforts to reinstate what Kiley describes as ‘law and order’ in contrast to the policies of Hochman’s predecessor, George Gascón, which he criticized harshly.
The debate continues amidst ongoing discussions about California’s status as a sanctuary state, another policy under scrutiny. Kiley highlighted the case of Aquino, noting that his undocumented status might offer him certain protections, complicating the legal proceedings.
Addressing the implications of undocumented immigrants facing capital punishment, Ryan Elizabeth Todd, an immigration attorney from New York City, stated that foreign nationals can indeed be sentenced to death in the U.S. She added that detained foreign nationals are supposed to be informed about their right to contact their consulate, although adherence to this requirement is not always consistent.
Aquino has been charged with murder following allegations that he killed Hernandez amidst committing a lewd act. Additionally, Aquino faces charges from a previous alleged sexual assault.
With the last execution in California carried out in 2006, the future of capital punishment in the state remains a contentious issue.
As debates and legal proceedings continue, the governor’s office has yet to respond to inquiries regarding his stance on this high-profile case and his policies on the death penalty. The community and lawmakers alike await further developments, questioning whether any shifts in policy might emerge from ongoing criticism.