吃瓜大本营

The ACLU could have its busiest Supreme Court term ever, with potential cases on immigration, voting rights, and religious freedom in schools.

CONCORD, N.H. 鈥� The New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled today that the 鈥渄isproportionality鈥� of the death penalty cannot be reviewed for Michael Addison, a Black man convicted in 2008 of killing a white police officer. Addison is the only person on the state鈥檚 death row and was sentenced to die prior to New Hampshire鈥檚 repeal of the death penalty in 2019. Today鈥檚 decision is not the last word on the legality of this execution, including whether it is constitutional in light of the legislature鈥檚 repeal of the death penalty. 鈥淭oday is a sad day that could lead New Hampshire down the path of becoming the first and only state to execute someone under a repealed death penalty statute,鈥� said Gilles Bissonnette, Legal Director of the ACLU of New Hampshire. 鈥淣ew Hampshire repealed the death penalty in 2019 because it is inhumane, unjust, racist, and error-prone鈥攖hings that are all still true today. The penalty of death cannot be proportionate in this case when someone convicted of an identical crime today would not receive the death penalty. While today's decision ignores this reality, the fight against the death penalty in this case will continue.鈥� The ACLU and several death penalty scholars submitted a friend-of-the-court brief in this case in October 2025, urging the New Hampshire Supreme Court to disallow this execution from ever taking place and highlighting that New Hampshire could become the first and only state to execute someone under a repealed death penalty statute. "It is extremely disappointing that the Court did not take this opportunity to address the disproportionate and inequitable death sentence imposed on Mr. Addison, the only person on New Hampshire鈥檚 death row and a Black man,鈥� said Megan Byrne, senior staff attorney at the ACLU鈥檚 Capital Punishment Project. 鈥淣ew Hampshire repealed the death penalty in 2019 because it recognized that the punishment is unjust, inhumane, and infected with racial bias. Mr. Addison's case puts those very problems on full display. New Hampshire should not move backward by defending a sentence under a law it has already rejected." The brief also asked the Court to consider the ways that racism contributed to Addison鈥檚 death sentence, saying, 鈥渢his Court should consider the legion of social science research explaining the ways that race likely contributed to the death sentence of a poor, Black man who did not 鈥榩urposefully kill鈥� the victim, particularly when the sentence came in the same year that a rich, white man was given a life sentence after purposefully bludgeoning someone to death with a sledgehammer alongside two others he had hired to kill the victim.鈥� The decision today comes amid renewed national scrutiny of the death penalty following Tennessee鈥檚 botched execution of Christa Pike last week. The horrific execution attempt was Tennessee鈥檚 second botched execution in less than 6 months.

JACKSON, Ms. 鈥� The American Civil Liberties Union, the ACLU of Mississippi, and partners filed an amicus brief today urging the Mississippi Supreme Court to consider Willie Manning鈥檚 claim that prosecutors unconstitutionally excluded Black prospective jurors from his 1994 capital trial. The brief warns that racial discrimination in jury selection was one of several alarming problems that undermine the reliability of Manning鈥檚 conviction and death sentence. At trial, prosecutors systematically excluded Black jurors from Manning鈥檚 jury, resulting in a nearly all white jury in a county where Black people made up 34% of the population. Prosecutors struck six of the nine Black prospective jurors, for reasons including that the prospective juror read 鈥淓bony鈥� or 鈥淛et鈥� magazines or lived in an 鈥渆xtremely bad neighborhood鈥� 鈥� in other words, a predominantly Black neighborhood. Manning鈥檚 lawyers challenged the strikes under Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court case that prohibits prosecutors from striking jurors based on race, but the trial judge accepted the prosecutor鈥檚 purportedly race-neutral explanations without conducting the proper legal analysis to determine whether they were simply pretexts for discrimination. 鈥淛uries are supposed to reflect the communities that they represent, and that鈥檚 for good reason: diverse juries deliberate more thoroughly, consider a wider range of evidence, and make fewer mistakes,鈥� said Anna Arceneaux, deputy director of the ACLU鈥檚 Capital Punishment Project. 鈥淲hen racial discrimination shapes who can serve on a jury, it undermines the fairness of the entire process for the accused and for prospective jurors alike. In Mr. Manning鈥檚 case, the evidence suggests that racial discrimination played a major role in shaping the jury that decided whether he would live or die, and when a person鈥檚 life is on the line, the court cannot afford to look past that.鈥� The racial discrimination in jury selection is particularly concerning in this case considering the broader questions surrounding Manning鈥檚 conviction and death sentence and known Batson violations in similar cases in Mississippi. Examples of prosecutorial misconduct, the known leading cause of wrongful convictions, run rampant throughout Manning鈥檚 case. The same district attorney who prosecuted Manning was responsible for sending several innocent people to prison who were later exonerated. At least twice in the last 7 years, the Supreme Court has sharply condemned Mississippi prosecutors' Batson violations in two cases with striking similarities to Manning鈥檚 (Flowers and Pitchford). 鈥淭o date, the justice system has failed Mr. Manning,鈥� said Ayanna Hill, racial justice attorney, at the ACLU of Mississippi. 鈥淲e are hopeful that can change, and the Court finds that a lower court鈥檚 lack of meaningful review of a prosecutor鈥檚 jury strikes undermines the validity of a conviction and death sentence.鈥� The ACLU and ACLU of Mississippi are asking the Mississippi Supreme Court to grant Manning permission to file a post-conviction relief petition to address the prosecution鈥檚 systematic and unconstitutional discrimination against Black prospective jurors. The amicus brief is available here.

Tennessee's execution policies prevent the press from witnessing critical stages before and after a state execution. However, the public needs to know how they work鈥攐r don't work鈥攖o participate in informed public debate. The ACLU's State Supreme Court Initiative, alongside the ACLU of Tennessee, filed an amicus brief explaining why a provision in the Tennessee Constitution that guarantees access to government proceedings requires greater press access to executions.