meta_pixel
Tapesearch Logo
Log in
Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts

Death Penalty Dust-Ups at the High Court

Amicus With Dahlia Lithwick | Law, justice, and the courts

Slate Audio

News Commentary,, Government, News

4.63.4K Ratings

🗓️ 13 April 2019

⏱️ 47 minutes

🧾️ Download transcript

Summary

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by Harvard Law School Professor Carol Steiker, co-author of Courting Death: The Supreme Court and Capital Punishment to explore recent death penalty cases before the Supreme Court and why the 8th amendment has raised tensions among the justices.

This episode is brought to you by The Great Courses Plus.  Get your free trial, plus 50% off your monthly plan at TheGreatCoursesPlus.com/Amicus.

Need to set up your Slate Plus feed? If you subscribed through Slate.com, check out our FAQ at slate.com/podcastfaqs for easy instructions. Members subscribed via Apple Podcasts get automatic access—no setup required.


Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Transcript

Click on a timestamp to play from that location

0:00.0

It's very hard to defend the death penalty, and they don't want to be in that position.

0:10.0

So instead, they want to keep hammering on the table and say, but it's constitutional

0:15.7

and therefore states should be allowed to do it, and therefore we shouldn't have to try to

0:19.9

defend it on its merits.

0:28.3

Hi and welcome back to Amicus Slate's podcast about the courts and the Supreme Court and the

0:34.3

rule of law. I'm Dahlia Lithwick. I cover many, some, most of those things

0:39.0

for Slate. This week brings us to a topic we actually haven't addressed really directly on the show

0:44.9

in, I think, a number of years, and that is the death penalty. The last few weeks have actually

0:50.2

brought us a raft of incredibly divisive and, and I think even rancorous, ugly public

0:56.8

fights on the court around capital punishment, which is very strange, given that the number

1:03.0

of executions in this country continues to drop. And yet, a Supreme Court presumably more

1:09.4

devoted than ever to proving that it all gets along all the time, despite everything, has been actually willing to punch and scratch and pull hair in a series of big death penalty cases in recent weeks.

1:22.1

This culminated a week ago in a doozy of a ruling about how painful an execution can be. We wanted to try to

1:30.6

understand why these death penalty cases seem to strike so deeply into the heart of the

1:38.1

justice's moral reasoning about the world and why they're willing to get so publicly mad about it.

1:43.9

To do that, we have invited on

1:46.0

Professor Carol Stiker. There is almost nobody out there who knows this better. She's the

1:51.5

Henry J. Friendly Professor of Law and Faculty Co-Director of the Criminal Justice Policy Program

1:57.2

at Harvard Law School. She specializes in criminal justice with a special focus on capital

2:02.1

punishment and her most recent book, Courting Death, the Supreme Court and Capital Punishment,

2:07.8

co-authored with her brother, Jordan Steiker, of the University of Texas School of Law,

2:12.4

was published by Harvard University Press in November 2016. My friend Link Kaplan called it, quote, the most important book about the death penalty in the United States, not only within the past generation, but arguably ever, end quote. Their research is sweeping. It is devastating about the ways in which the death penalty is currently administered. And Carol, it is just a thrill to

...

Please login to see the full transcript.

Disclaimer: The podcast and artwork embedded on this page are from Slate Audio, and are the property of its owner and not affiliated with or endorsed by Tapesearch.

Generated transcripts are the property of Slate Audio and are distributed freely under the Fair Use doctrine. Transcripts generated by Tapesearch are not guaranteed to be accurate.

Copyright © Tapesearch 2026.