A Five Year Vision for Bringing Us Closer to National Abolition of the Death Penalty
As of 6/08/2018
Introduction
The national strategy to abolish the death penalty is at an important juncture. For more than 10 years, policy,
communications, research, and litigation efforts have contributed to changing the national narrative about the
death penalty. For the first time in the modern era, the Gallup poll shows that support for the death penalty is
well below 60 percent, while several other respected national pollsters indicate that support has dropped
below 50 percent. Voices across the ideological spectrum are calling for alternatives. With seven repeal wins
and death sentencing at an all time low, there is no question that the death penalty is on its way out.
The 8th Amendment strategy of abolishing the death penalty at the Supreme Court has always recognized
that convincing a majority of the Court that a national consensus against the death penalty exists will require
us to demonstrate that a large majority of states have ended their use of capital punishment in law or in
practice.
It is impossible to know when the Court will be ready to consider this issue or exactly what they need to see
to convince them that a consensus has emerged. But, recent indications suggest that we do not yet have a
majority on the Court who are ready to consider this issue. It is our view that we need to keep sentences and
executions low while demonstrating consistent movement away from the death penalty through additional
legislative repeal wins.
In order to move more states into the legal repeal column, we need to identify which of the remaining states
present the best opportunity for repeal. The good news is that there is real opportunity given that so few
states in the country have an active relationship with the death penalty. Low usage leads to lower interest and
investment in the policy. With this in mind, the potential list of states that could be persuaded to legally
abandon the death penalty with a strategic campaign is large. Furthermore, winning creates momentum, so
the list will get longer with each success.
The 8" Amendment Project staff have spent the last few months reaching out to partners in all of the states to
brainstorm possibilities and to identify political opportunities. In order to ascertain which states are closest to
repeal, we identified the three criteria that enable us to prioritize states. States that meet all or most of these
criteria are best positioned to lead successful repeal campaigns.
We used this comprehensive assessment process to develop a five year plan that will greatly improve our
chances of success at the Court. It is possible the Court will decide to act before this five year period is up, or
before we achieve all of the goals we have laid out, however, we believe that it is in our best interest to move
full steam ahead with this plan until the Court reveals its intentions to consider this issue.
Five Year Outcomes
We have identified six outcomes that we want to achieve over the next five years to move us closer to our
ultimate goal, and we have laid out the scope of work that will be necessary to achieve each of them. We
believe these outcomes are achievable by the end of 2023.
Five Year Outcomes
Legislative repeal victories in 3 to 7 states;
Keep death sentences under 40/year;
Keep executions under 30/year;
Major gubernatorial action (moratorium or mass commutation) in 3 to 6 states;
Keep at least 5 to 10 states in the “de facto” column;
Maintain regular media coverage that echoes the message that the death penalty is in decline, its use
is isolated, and it is broken beyond repair.
SVN WBNS i
Below we provide a timeline for achieving each of these outcomes and briefly describe the primary
components of the work that will be necessary for success. We also lay out our assessment as to why each of
these outcomes is possible in greater detail below.
Outcome #1: Legislative repeal victories in 3 to 7 states
We developed three criteria for evaluating whether states have the potential for legislatively repealing the
death penalty within the next five years. We then used these criteria to come up with a list of 10 states that
are in various stages of readiness (“primed,” “semi-primed,” and “unprimed”). Based on this analysis, we
believe achieving repeal in three to seven states over the next five years is both ambitious and possible.
To accomplish this, we will need to invest resources into each of these state campaigns at varying levels,
depending on what investments have already been made and what is needed. These will range from modest
investments of twenty to thirty thousand dollars a year to more substantial investments as the states
approach readiness for repeal. (It should be noted that only one of the four states that successfully moved a
repeal bill out of committee in 2018 received any financial resources for 2018. New Hampshire received
approximately $25,000.) Going forward, resources will also be needed for several national organizations
who--utilizing economies of scale--can provide support to multiple states simultaneously in the form of
coordinating and highlighting key constituencies and providing strategic guidance.
Three Criteria for Repeal In’
1. Has the state moved away from a cultural attachment to the death penalty through extremely low or no
use? A state that has the death penalty on the books but never uses it is not getting value out of the policy.
Frustration with the policy is high, and it is easier for advocates and communications experts to lift the
broken system messages and advocate for ending it. A smaller death row also means fewer cases with bad
facts, and fewer victims’ families and prosecutors who are invested in particular death sentences.
2. Is there a coalition of organizations and individuals in the state that can be mobilized to give public cover
to the decision makers? A successful repeal effort needs both prominent supporters from across the
political spectrum as well as specific grasstops leaders in key legislative districts who can help get the bill
over the line. The campaign team needs strong leadership who can work with in-state coalition members
and national allies to bring maximum resources to the effort. They also need to understand how media and
grassroots organizing can support their legislative efforts.
3. 1s there political opportunity in the state to move the bill in the next year or two? This is often the hardest
to ascertain as it can be very fluid, depending on elections and other political factors. There are a few
components to this analysis. A state that is close to repeal will likley have two of the three pieces (Senate,
House, Governor) already ready to go before the final push begins. This can mean that a state has two
houses with a majority of members who are ready to support repeal, but work needs to be done to get the
governor. Or it can also mean that the state has a solid vote count in one house and the governor has
expressed support, but they still need to get the final few votes in the other house. Political opportunity
also means that there is a way to get through committees and that the leadership in both houses will not
stop the bill from succeeding. When a state campaign is ready for a final push, the opposition begins to
show up. Getting the third and final piece of the puzzle can be as or more difficult than the earlier parts of
the campaign, so there needs to be a clear strategy and resources for it to become possible.
“Primed” States
Washington
There is a moratorium on executions in Washington and there does not seem to be any significant effort to
end it and to move forward on executions. There are only eight people on death row and death sentences
are rare. Washington has a governor who will sign a repeal bill, and in 2018 a bipartisan majority in the
Senate voted to support repeal by a 26 to 22 margin. The 2018 House committee also supported repeal by
one vote. There were not enough votes in the House to pass the bill (They needed 50 and likely had
somewhere in the 45 to 49 range. Democratic leadership in the House may also have been an obstacle). The
campaign did a good job cultivating support from sitting prosecutors and voices across the spectrum. They
have Republican supporters of the bill in each house. Going forward there needs to be a clear plan as to
how to address the gaps in the House and increase grassroots activity in districts of key legislators. There
needs to be better communication between all the potential supporters in the state and nationally to
successfully utilize all available resources for the effort. The Washington State Supreme Court is also
considering challenge to the constitutionality of the death penalty, which has the potential to knock the state
into the repeal column at any moment.
New Hampshire
New Hampshire has not executed anyone in the modern age and they have one person on death row. They
have a House that has continuously supported repeal by a 2 to | margin regardless of whether it was
controlled by the Republicans or the Democrats. In 2018, a majority of Senators co-sponsored a repeal bill,
but the Governor threatened to veto the bill. Despite this setback, the bill passed out of the Republican-
controlled Senate by a vote of 14 to 10 and the House by a two-thirds majority, 223-116.
Successful repeal in New Hampshire will hinge on who is elected as governor in the 2018, whether they
can get the votes for a veto override, or whether it is possible to get the current governor to change his
mind. The campaign team there is well organized and does a lot with very little. They have a diverse
number of voices and have successfully recruited Republicans and law enforcement voices. Law
enforcement has traditionally been in opposition to the bill, given that the one person on death row is there
for killing a police officer. The campaign team will need only modest funding if roadblocks can be cleared.
Utah
Utah has not sentenced anyone to death since 2009. There have been seven executions in the modern age
and there are nine people on death row. The media is very supportive of repeal with consistent stories about
the problems, the cost, and the effort to end it. In 2016, the Utah Senate passed a repeal bill. The House
committee has twice supported repeal, this year by a 7 to 4 margin. The Governor has indicated he would
consider signing a bill because the policy fails victims.
The hurdle has been getting enough votes in the House to move repeal and to hold onto the votes in the
Senate. The speaker supported repeal in 2018 but this is his last term. The Utah legislature has a 45 day
session and historically the campaign team hasn’t been able to utilize the months leading up to the session
to firm up a vote count. They are a savvy and smart coalition who work well together, and with the national
movement.
One disadvantage has been that there is no campaign manager whose only job it is to think about the bill
and what needs to be done in the months leading up to session. They have identified conservative, law
enforcement, and victim voices but have not yet brought them to the legislators who need to hear from
them. They still need to identify some Mormon grasstops who are willing to publicly associate with the
campaign even though they have a fair amount of support from Mormon legislators.The key leaders in the
group all work for multi-issue organizations which means their time on this issue is limited.
Kansas
Kansas has not executed anyone since the 1960s and there are currently 10 people on death row in the state.
Often there are no death sentences in a year-- the last one was two years ago. In addition to its almost non-
existent use, Kansas citizens have continuously voted to retain Supreme Court members who protect the
rights of men on death row even after well resourced campaigns attacked their death penalty decisions.
The campaign’s vote count shows a majority for repeal in both houses, though the Senate count is by the
exact amount needed. What makes Kansas different than other Republican controlled states is that there is a
healthy moderate Republican influence in the state and in the legislature. It is said that there are three
parties in Kansas: Democrats, Moderate Republicans, and Conservative Republicans. The campaign has
supporters in all three groups.
The obstacle has been getting leadership in the legislature to allow the bill to move forward. The Lt.
Governor Jeff Colyer was just sworn in as new Governor. Colyer is a long time loyalist of Brownback and
they were a tight team through the years. Colyer is also a strong Catholic like Brownback. He has said very
little about the death penalty in the past and he is on the record supporting it. He will be up for election in
2018. The campaign needs to ascertain where he really is on the issue to figure out whether he is a big
obstacle to repeal or if they can work with him to get him to sign a bill.
The Kansas campaign team has made good use of the generous resources given to them over the last
several years and continues to work even though the resources are gone. They have gathered an impressive
cadre of grasstops voices from conservative and pro life constituencies, communities of color, victims, law
enforcement, and faith groups. Together, it represents the diversity of the state.
The campaign worked with the Republican Party to remove their pro death penalty platform and got
smaller Republican groups like the Republican Liberty Caucus and the College Republicans to endorse
repeal. The team has consistently generated media from all of these voices naming the broken criminal
justice system. They have also developed a long term relationship with allies in the legislature. The
campaign team will need only modest funding if roadblocks can be cleared.
Montana
Montana has just two people on death row, one of whom is a Canadian national. They haven’t sentenced
anyone to death in more than 10 years and there have been no executions since 2006. Currently Montana
does not have a valid lethal injection protocol so executions are on hold indefinitely. The legislature would
have to pass a “fix” in order to restart executions. They have come very close to passing repeal in the past
(In 2015, the House deadlocked in a vote of 50 to 50).
The Montana Abolition Coalition is a small but well functioning group. They are working on a shoestring
budget this year and have had to cut back hours for their director and lobbyist, and essentially give up their
conservative organizer. However, years of investments means the assets can be reactivated in pretty quick
fashion with modest resources. The legislature only meets in odd years, and elections are held every two
years, so there is a lot of turnover from one session to the next.
The coalition usually starts meeting with all candidates after the primary so they can quickly develop a vote
count after the November elections. They also find out committee assignments in mid-November. Both
chambers are currently controlled by Republicans. It’s possible Dems could gain a few seats in the House
next year (there are 10-14 toss-up seats, including three held by Republican bill champions). A shift in the
Senate is less likely, though a few seats could move.
It will be difficult to assess viability until the November election occurs. The governor Steve Bullock is a
Democrat and has indicated he would sign a repeal bill if it got to his desk, and veto any bad bills, but he’s
unlikely to lift a finger to move anything. The biggest gap appears to be the unpredictability of the
legislature from term to term. There is reason to believe they could have some support from leadership
under several different scenarios. But we won’t really know anything until the end of 2018.
“Semi-Primed” States
Nevada
Nevada hasn’t carried out an execution in more than 10 years, however, the state is currently attempting to
carry out the execution of Scott Dozier, a volunteer. The execution has been delayed until the Nevada
Supreme Court can review the execution protocols. Clark County (Las Vegas) remains a problem spot with
regards to sentencing. It had the second highest number of new death sentences in 2017 with four. There
are 81 people on death row, so that should be a consideration in any effort.
The legislature meets every other year in odd years for just four months (Feb to June). Both houses are
currently controlled by Dems, but the governor is a Republican. The fate of any legislative effort will
depend entirely on who is elected governor in 2018. In 2017, advocates attempted to move a repeal bill, but
were stymied by Democratic leadership, especially in the Judiciary committee, who would not even allow a
vote on the bill. With some outreach work and a new governor, this could change. But more work to obtain
a vote count and identify roadblocks would need to be done. One of the leading Democratic candidate for
governor is a strong supporter of abolition the Republican is a strong opponent. Viability will depend on
the 2018 election.
The major gap has been infrastructure for the coalition, as they have not had anyone building relationships
with the grasstops or grassroots in between sessions. It is also difficult to keep momentum with a
legislature that only meets every other year. The Nevada coalition currently has no paid staff. They have
developed a few relationships over the years with victims families, former law enforcement, faith leaders,
and small government conservatives, but much more work is needed to build up the grassroots and
grasstops. They are undergoing an effort to raise funds to hire staff by mid-year 2018, but it is not clear if it
will be successful. The ACLU of Nevada has been a strong partner, and could be helpful with a repeal
effort.
Louisiana
Louisiana has 73 people on death row and has executed 28 people since 1976. In the last 10 years there
have been no more than five death sentences in a single year and several years with three or fewer.
The Senate has 39 members with a split of 25 Republicans and 14 Democrats. Last session the campaign
counted 18 clear yes votes for repeal (They need at least two more confirmed yes votes to reach the 20
votes needed to pass). The Senate President is from the southern part of the state which is heavily Catholic.
He is Catholic and has not made his position clear, but prefers that the bill begin in the House. The House
has 105 members with 61 Republicans, 41 Democrats and three Independents.
A rough vote count by the campaign has the breakdown as a third in support of repeal, a third in opposition,
and a third is unknown. The House speaker is also Catholic and from the southern part of the state. He is
not expected to get in the way of an effort to repeal if there is interest from his members. Last session a
repeal bill made it out of Senate committee. The sponsor understandably wants a clear win before he holds
a vote on the floor. The consensus of the campaign team is to wait until 2020 to run another bill, after the
current governor is re-elected. The governor is a Democrat and has been very supportive of criminal justice
reform efforts.
The campaign team needs an in-state manager whose only job is to think death penalty repeal. This person
could pull volunteers together and make sure that the work is getting done in the areas that are most helpful
to move the bill. The campaign is currently lacking numbers of Evangelical voices and leaders of color in
key districts in the state. It would help to have some additional organizing capacity to expand the network
of supporters to people that can help deliver specific legislators.
Colorado
Colorado only has three people on death row. One of those, Nathan Dunlap, has exhausted all of his
appeals. The other two individuals stand convicted of killing Senator Rhonda Field’s son and daughter-in-
law. There has only been once execution in the last 50 years, and that took place in 1997, more than 20
years ago.
For the last few years, one the the most fervent concerns has been that if a repeal bill was to pass in the
legislature, Senator Rhonda Fields would attempt to hijack the effort and turn it into a ballot initiative, or
qualify an initiative to repeal the repeal. Fields seems to have evolved in her thinking, especially after
bonding with Senator Guzman (also a victim family member). Last year, when Guzman held a hearing on
her repeal bill, Fields “took a walk” rather than vote no, just as she promised Guzman she would do. Fields
has struggled with her position and and has suggested she might even support repeal if it didn’t interfere
with her son’s case. She has expressed no appetite for putting up a major fight against a prospective repeal
bill or launching an initiative effort, as least while Senator Guzman was leading the effort.
Guzman is termed out at the end of 2018. We can’t fully predict what Fields may do in the future, but the
threat seems to have lessened slightly. The House is currently controlled by Dems and the Senate by
Republicans. In 2017, the coalition was unable to move the repeal bill out of the Republican controlled
Senate committee. It is predicted that the Dems will keep the House in the 2018 elections and the Senate
will likely flip back to the Dems, though probably only by a vote or two at the most. To move a bill,
another author would have to be found, and a few Republicans would still have to support the bill,
especially in the Senate. Colorado has a history of coming close to passing repeal legislatively and under
the right circumstances, it is possible it could happen in the future.
The current governor, John Hickenlooper, is termed out at the end of 2018. There are several Dem
candidates for governor that could be allies. The top Republican candidate (Walker Stapleton) is very pro-
death penalty. The top Dem contenders are nearly all supporters of repeal. We should keep a close eye on
the election results in November, because if things align, there could be an opportunity there. Quite a bit of
money was invested in Colorado over the last few years so they have done some grasstops work, but
COADP lost its only staff member last year to illness. However, they have just hired a new director who
started in March. Things could scale up quickly with modest resources if an opportunity presented itself.
“Unprimed” States
There are at least two states (Wyoming and Kentucky) that due to almost non-existent usage could be
considered candidates for repeal in three to five years based on criteria if modest investments are made now.
Wyoming
Wyoming has no one on death row. The last death sentence was in 2005. There is no public organized
statewide repeal campaign at this time, though there are current discussions going on between the WY
ACLU, the Catholic Conference, the Wyoming Interfaith Network and a conservative policy group.
Wyoming culture shares similarities to Utah and Montana where organizing efforts have proven to be
successful. Both houses are controlled by Republicans. There is a governor’s race this year with no clear
leader at this time.
Kentucky
Kentucky has not executed anyone in 10 years and the last person was a volunteer. There have been only
two death sentences in recent years with juries rejecting death in the most egregious cases time and time
again. There is bipartisan support for repeal in the legislature but not majority support at this time, and no
interest from leadership to move repeal. There are diverse voices in the state supporting repeal but no broad
campaign effort. This year a serious mental illness exception bill made it out of committee. New execution
protocols were recently released that will now be litigated further. The governor is an evangelical
businessman who has not talked much about the death penalty.
Outcome #2: Keep death sentences under 40/year
In addition to the NOLO Project and several state-based litigation shops that are successfully assisting trial
attorneys to prevent new death sentences, local advocacy focused on high use prosecutors has been
successful at lowering sentences. Death penalty advocates are closely collaborating with local criminal and
racial justice advocates and newly elected reform-minded prosecutors in looking for more humane practices
in prosecutors’ offices, including reduced use of the death penalty.
The enormous amounts of money put into advocacy around prosecutors nationally! allows the death penalty
movement to now take advantage of this effort with minimal financial investment. The abolition movement
can decrease use of the death penalty in high use counties by making sure that the death penalty is added to
the platform developed by local advocates calling for better local prosecutorial practices. 8AP and its
partners can make sure that local coalitions have information and materials about the use of the death
penalty in their local area and the problems associated with it. Leaders in the death penalty movement can
encourage those working on prosecutors to consider prioritizing high death sentencing counties when they
choose the areas where they are looking to run campaigns.
The counties with the most sentences in the past five years are: Los Angeles, Riverside, Kern, Orange,
Maricopa, Clark, Mobile, and Duval. This list of eight counties is down from 16 total counties just a few
years ago. This area of advocacy work is now so well resourced that the primary investments needed for
this work are on the litigation side. Preventing new federal death sentences continues to be a focal point for
the litigation strategy. Investments have also been made in training for capital trial attorneys.
' Organizations such as ACLU Smart Justice, Smart Justice California, Fair Punishment Project, PICO, Real
Change PAC, Color of Change, and Fair and Just Prosecution have all put resources into working on
prosecutor campaigns or shaping prosecutor policies.
Outcome #3: Keep executions under 30/year”
Litigators have been keeping executions at bay by successfully chipping away at the death penalty through
the courts. Policy advocates and communications professionals have been tremendously helpful over the
last few years in lifting up unusual voices in the media for clemency campaigns and in support of
moratoriums. Advocates have also built strong relationships with influencers in the state who can impact
governors, attorneys general, and parole boards.* Some of the states currently doing this work are Ohio,
Missouri, Texas, Arkansas, Georgia, and Virginia. Several states have not carried out executions over the
last few years due to lethal injection issues but have large lists of people in danger as the litigation efforts
come to an end. These states include Oklahoma, Tennessee, Arizona, and Kentucky. We must continue to
innovate and adapt to deal with these new threats.
Tennessee, Missouri, Ohio, Virginia, Georgia, and Texas have been able to raise some funds on their own,
and work closely with capital attorneys those doing case communications. Oklahoma and Arizona have
almost no infrastructure for this work. The Kentucky campaign has done a lot with a little and has raised
their own funds. These states will all benefit from national investments in case cc ications, and in the
coordination and illumination of unusual voices, including conservatives and business leaders (Responsible
Trade Initiative), as well as strategic outreach efforts aimed at their governors.
Outcome #4: Major gub. ial action (1 ium or mass ion) in 3 to 6 states
There are half a dozen states that present opportunities for major gubernatorial action based on elections
that will occur in 2018 and 2020. These opportunities will require some very modest resources for state
level advocacy (in some cases non-monetary resources will be all that is needed), and they will benefit
from national investments in the coordination and illumination of several types of unusual voices. A brief
summary of the opportunities is below:
e@ California (2018) - There are two possibilities for momentum in California, one before the current
governor retires at the end of 2018, and one with a newly-elected governor in 2019.
e@ Oregon (2018) - The current governor has pledged major action after she is re-elected in 2018
e Nevada (2018) - If the leading Democratic candidate wins election, she is a very good candidate for
major action. She is a strong ally of the abolitionist movement.
e@ Colorado (2018) - If one of the Democratic candidates wins, there is a strong potential to continue
the moratorium or move toward commutation for the three people on the row.
e Washington (in office thru 2020) - There is an opportunity to convince the current governor to
commute the row before he leaves office.
e North Carolina (2020) - If the Democrat is re-elected in 2020, there is an opportunity to convince
him to declare a moratorium or commute some sentences in his second term.
e There may be additional opportunities after the 2018 election that have not yet been identified.
Outcome #5: Keep at least 5 to 10 states in the “de facto” column
There are currently 12 states that have not carried out an execution in more than 10 years. These de facto
states play in a key role in how the Court may eventually count consensus. Many of these states overlap
with our best prospects for repeal, so as we successfully move them from the “de facto” column to the
repeal column, the number of de facto states will decrease. Investments in the state repeal campaigns will
simultaneously help protect the majority of these states from resuming executions, so no additional
resources will be needed to achieve this outcome. In North Carolina, Oregon, and Pennsylvania, there are
sympathetic governors who can play a key role in preventing executions. In Nebraska, local litigators and
? This outcome may be the hardest to achieve. Lethal injection litigation has been holding up executions for
many years in some of these places, and when it is eventually resolved, we could see a steep increase in
executions. There are also real threats at the federal level.
$ An additional benefit of litigation, policy work, and gubernatorial strategies is the impact they have on the
size of death row. While we don’t have reducing the size of death row listed as a distinct outcome in this
document, it is undoubtedly important. It not only reduces the number of individuals facing the threat of
execution, but it is a valuable metric on its own.
advocates are pursuing a number of litigation tactics that have the potential to keep executions at bay for
the foreseeable future. By 2022, several new states may be eligible to be added to the list of “de facto”
states. Advocates can also play defense at the legislative level to defeat any efforts to resume executions.
Outcome #6: Maintain regular media that echoes the message that the death penalty is in
decline, its use is isolated, and it’s broken beyond repair
This outcome will primarily be achieved as a secondary benefit of all of the previously stated efforts,
however, it will also be important to create a steady drumbeat in the media highlighting the growing trend
against the death penalty. This can be done by highlighting new research that examines the flaws in the
system, elevating new voices, and by providing regular tracking of trends and data. Efforts should be made
to include ethnic, religious, and womens’ media where it is strategic.
Timeline for Outcomes 2019-2023
Year 1 & 2 - 2019 & 2020
Scope of Work Desired Outcomes
Fully fund primed and semi-primed state repeal campaigns; At least 1-3 legislative repeal wins
e State repeal campaign coordination support by national partners;
© Communications/coordination for state repeal campaigns
o Conservatives
Communities of color
Business voices
Exoneree voices
Religious voices
Law enforcement
00000
Litigation work to keep death sentences low; Keep death sentences under 40/year
State/local level advocacy to reduce new death sentences (heavy
investments coming from outside the death penalty funding
community)
National case communications work to reduce executions; Keep executions under 30/year
National communication/coordination of business voices;
State level advocacy to reduce executions;
Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions;
Lethal injection litigation;
Federal monitoring/intervention
National communications on consensus trends; Media echoes the message that the death penalty is in
National communications on conservatives; decline, use is isolated, broken beyond repair
Exoneree communications;
State communications on consensus trends;
National communications on law enforcement
State level advocacy on new governor action (moratorium or At least 1-3 governors declare a moratorium or empty
commutation); death row
National communication/coordination of business voices;
Exoneree communications
Seed funding for “unprimed” repeal campaigns; Move 2 states closer to repeal in 2021/22
State repeal campaign coordination support
National case communications work to reduce executions; Keep at least 10 states in “de facto” column
State level advocacy to reduce executions;
Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions;
Lethal injection litigation
Years 3 & 4 - 2021 & 2022
Investments/Scope of Work
Desired Outcomes
Fully fund primed and semi-primed state repeal campaigns:
© State repeal campaign coordination support by national partners:
Communications/coordination for state repeal campaigns
o Conservatives
Communities of color
Business voices
Exoneree voices
Religious voices
Law enforcement
00000
At least 1-3 legislative repeal wins
Litigation work to keep death sentences low;
State/local level advocacy to reduce new death sentences (heavy
investments coming from outside the death penalty funding
community)
Keep death sentences under 40/year
National case communications work to reduce executions;
National communication/coordination of business voices;
State level advocacy to reduce executions;
Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions;
Lethal injection litigation;
Federal monitoring/intervention
Keep executions under 30/year
National communications on consensus trends;
National communications on conservatives;
Exoneree communications;
State communications on consensus trends;
National communications on law enforcement
Media echoes the message that the death penalty is in
decline, use is isolated, broken beyond repair
State level advocacy on new governor action (moratorium or
commutation);
National communication/coordination of business voices;
Exoneree communications
At least 1-2 governors declare a moratorium or empty
death row
Seed funding for “unprimed” repeal campaigns;
State repeal campaign coordination support
Move | state closer to repeal in 2023
National case communications work to reduce executions;
State level advocacy to reduce executions;
Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions;
Lethal injection litigation (as needed)
Keep at least 7 states in “de facto” column (ideally
some current de facto states become repeal states, so
there will be fewer states in this column)
Year 5 - 2023
Investments/Scope of Work
Desired Outcomes
Fully fund primed and semi-primed state repeal campaigns;
State repeal campaign coordination support by national partners;
© Communications/coordination for state repeal campaigns
o — Conservativ
Communities of color
Business voices
Exoneree voices
Religious voices
Law enforcement
00000
At least | legislative repeal win
© Litigation work to keep death sentences low;
© State/local level advocacy to reduce new death sentences (as
needed);
Keep death sentences under 40/year
National case communications work to reduce executions; Keep executions under 30/year
National communication/coordination of business voices;
State level advocacy to reduce executions;
Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions;
injection litigation;
Federal monitoring/intervention
National communications on consensus trends; Media echoes the message that the death penalty is in
National communications on conservatives; decline, use is isolated, broken beyond repair
Exoneree communications;
State communications on consensus trends;
National communications on law enforcement
State level advocacy on new governor action (moratorium or At least 1 governor declares a moratorium or empties
commutation); death row
National communication/coordination of business voices;
Exoneree communications
e National case communications work to reduce executions; Keep at least 5 states in “de facto” column (ideally
© State level advocacy to reduce executions; some current de facto states become repeal states, so
e Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions; there will be fewer states in this column)
Resource Priorities
To achieve the six outcomes listed in our five year plan, we believe it is necessary to prioritize investments
and resources in the most effective ways possible. To this end, we have put each piece of work into one of
four categories, from the most critical to work that is valuable but doesn’t currently warrant singular
investment. These categories are described below.
Level 1 - Critical Work - This work is mission critical, we can’t move forward without it. (approx 60-70% of
available resources)
e Fully fund “primed” and “semi-primed” repeal campaigns (this includes mobilizing all key local
constituencies necessary to win state repeal: conservatives, communities of color, faith, victims
enforcement, exonerees, business, etc. This may be achieved through economies of scale.)
e State repeal campaign coordination and support by national partners
e Litigation work to keep death sentences low
e State/county level advocacy to reduce new death sentences (heavy investments coming from outside
the death penalty funding community)
e National communications on consensus trends
e@ National case communications work to reduce executions
law
Level 2 - Important work - This work makes achieving the mi:
resources)
e Seed funding for “unprimed” repeal campaigns
e National communications/coordination (this is in addition to state level work)
© Conservatives
© Business/International voices
co Exonerees
e Strategic impact litigation and affiliated research
e State level advocacy to reduce executions
°
°
on much more likely. (approx 20-30% of
State level advocacy on major gubernatorial action (moratorium or commutation)
Pushing back against reinstatement attempts.‘
4 In the last several years reinstatement attempts have been tried in Illinois, Massachusetts, Delaware, lowa, and New
Mexico. While efforts like this are not new, it is clear that there is a partisan element to these campaigns. This year's
attempts came right before the election in states where GOP governors are gunning for re-election. If these attempts
fizzle out and generate little support, they may lose their salience over time. However it is unlikely we have seen the last
Level 3 - Helpful work - This work makes achieving the mission somewhat more likely. (approx 10% of
resources)
e Post conviction litigation work to reduce executions
e National communications/coordination (this is in addition to state level work)
oo Religious voices
© Law enforcement voices
e State communications on consensus trends
e Federal monitoring/intervention* (*This work is higher priority through 2018 due to unique
circumstances; thereafter it is likely to be in level 3 depending on political developments.)
e Lethal injection litigation/comms
Level 4 - Work has value - This work adds value to the mission but does not rise to the level of funding at
this time. (0% of funding)
e National communications/coordination for SMI campaigns (see lengthy footnote on the undeniable
value of the SMI work.)>
e State led SMI campaigns
e State led reform campaigns
e State campaigns that maintain the status quo.
How the Death Penalty Fits Into the Larger Criminal Justice Reform Movement
The anti-death penalty movement has developed a symbiotic relationship with the criminal justice reform
and racial justice movements. Strategic partnerships have been formed with reform organizations working
to change prosecutorial practices at the county level and with those groups that are interested in addressing
racial and class disparities in the system.
These partnerships have led to some key victories across the country, including in places such as Duval,
Houston, and Contra Costa. Furthermore, there is some reliable evidence to suggest that eliminating the
death penalty in several states, including Connecticut, has allowed progress to be made on other criminal
justice issues, which was not possible while the death penalty was on the table. The death penalty
movement also pioneered outreach to several key constituency groups, such as victims and law
enforcement. These relationships have subsequently been leveraged to support a broader range of reforms.°
of them yet. Usually these efforts require staff time rather than financial resources, so they are unlikely to have a
significant impact on the budget.
5 For the last three years, a number of states have worked towards lifting up the issue of severe mental
illness and the death penalty through legislative and communications efforts. Despite some modest
successes, full passage of SMI legislation appears to be several years away, even in those states where we
have gotten the most traction. As we pivot towards a more focused effort to move repeal legislation, we are
not recommending renewed financial investments in SMI campaigns. However, if a state believes that
continuing with this effort is worthwhile and is the best way for them to contribute to the national strategy, we
support that decision as we continue to see the considerable value in these campaigns. The messaging and
education benefits from the SMI campaigns have been clear. Nearly a dozen states over the past two years
have successfully lifted the issue of mental illness and the death penalty by pushing bills excluding the
seriously mentally ill from capital punishment. This year, South Dakota passed the bill through one chamber
and Kentucky passed it through a committee. Last year, Texas passed a bill through a committee. Ohio,
Virginia, Indiana, Idaho, and Tennessee also successfully placed media stories drawing attention to the
issues. Missouri joined the list of states with SMI bills this year, and in previous years bill have been
advanced in Arkansas and North Carolina. 8AP and other national organizations will remain on the lookout
for opportunities to provide non-financial support, assistance, and capacity to state campaigns where
substantial strategic benefit can be identified.
® This is especially true in California where organizations such as Californians for Safety and Justice were
able to effectively leverage these relationships for subsequent reform work. Most recently, these
relationships were leveraged in Florida to push back against Marsy’s law.
Likewise, the death penalty movement has been able to build on the outreach being done to Conservatives
on a variety of criminal justice efforts. This increasingly effective, collaborative, and mutually beneficial
relationship promises to lead to even more victories in the future. You can read more about how ending the
death penalty is crucial to advancing criminal justice reform in our longer memo here.
The Role of Coordination
The central purpose of 8" Amendment Project has been to generate an opinion by the United States
Supreme Court holding that the evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society,
prohibit imposition of capital punishment. Unlike the 2025 Campaign that was largely reactive or
responsive to the field, 8AP has taken on the role of directing efforts. 8AP was created by a funder/field
deliberative process that recognized that the only way to achieve abolition in our lifetime with limited
financial resources was to pursue a directed campaign that could prioritize resources and direct the strategy
accordingly.
Going forward, 8AP is willing to adapt to fulfill the needs identified by the movement and adjust its
structure accordingly. Here is a review of 8AP’s leadership thus far:
1. Incubating Strategic Initiatives.
In consultation with partners across the country, 8AP looks for new strategies and initiatives that can
significantly advance goals of the national campaign. 8AP does not just support organizations that exist, but
rather it helps inspire the creation of campaigns, projects, and other initiatives. One of 8AP’s critical
benchmarks in this effort is creating organizations that can ultimately be self-sufficient. Over a short period
of time, 8AP has quietly assisted in the development of a series of projects that advance the abolition effort.
This includes:
e = The Fair Punishment Project, which began as a project of 8AP with the goal of highlighting
prosecutors who are overzealous in their approach to the death penalty. The project was so
successful that it expanded in scope, attracted new resources, and now operates independently of
8AP as a valuable partner in the county strategy to reduce new death sentences.
e The No and Low Use “NOLO” Project, which was first conceived by 8AP in 2014, has reduced
the number of new death sentences across the country and is partly responsible for keeping states
that have reduced or low usage from re ing in capital punist
e Responsible Trade Initiative on the Death Penalty (RTD, was recently created to develop
relationships with business leaders, international public authorities, and trade associations with
concerns about the death penalty and to bring those concerns to key policy makers. In its infancy
stage, the project has already been met with great enthusiasm by government and business leaders
alike. 8AP will continue to guide the initiative to explore its impact in creating support for repeal and
preventing executions.
2. Communicate regularly with allies to focus efforts and resources on key benchmarks.
After consulting with myriad experts in our movement, 8AP refines the national strategy throughout the
year and provides direction to allies as needed. With extremely limited resources, it is important that
partner groups remain fluid and willing to adapt their work and strategy as needs in the movement arise.
Groups like Catholic Mobilizing Network and Witness to Innocence work consistently with 8AP to address
new threats and take advantage of opportunities that arise throughout the year. At a moments notice they
can be brought into a strategy to address the planned execution spree in Arkansas or help find impactful
voices to move leadership in Louisiana’s legislature. One of the critical components of the 8AP effort is to
ensure that groups that do not receive abolition funding (or significant amounts of abolition funding) still
proceed in a manner that is consistent with broader 8AP efforts and other criminal justice reform efforts.
For instance, even a group with limited capacity can contribute to the national messaging strategy that is
key to the SCOTUS strategy.
3. Monitoring and responding to threats and opportunities, and collaborating to address them.
8AP keeps tabs on death penalty trends and news nationwide to identify new threats and opportunities that
can impact the national strategy. Threats can include a state beginning to resume executions, or efforts to
reinstate the death penalty. Opportunities can include newly identified paths for legislative repeal or reform
or new opportunities with governors. 8AP helps to facilitate a response by bringing together national and
local partners to address the situation.
4. Keeping the d and informed on best practices.
8AP works to keep the death penalty community connected and aware of each other’s challenges and
successes and what they can be doing to help with the national strategy. 8AP connects litigators, policy
advocates, organizers and subject-matter specialists thru list serves, video conferencing, movement-wide
conference calls, and in-person convenings to exchange ideas, create buy-in, and identify new ways to
advance the national strategy. 8AP regularly holds meetings with the advisory board comprised of senior
leaders in the movement to get input on the national strategy and challenges. 8AP is also dedicated to
identifying and mobilizing new allies and partners.
5. Addressing capacity gaps with technical assistance/consulting for partners.
National and local partners do most of the implementation of the strategy after coordination and
consultation with the 8AP team. However, given the reduced capacity in the movement and the numbers of
threats and opportunities that arise on a daily basis, 8AP staff frequently jump in to provide technical
assistance, strategic guidance, and extra capacity to partners who urgently need it.
6. Identifying new funding streams and advising current funders for maximum impact.
8AP believes that an essential component of a campaign to abolish the death penalty involves identifying
and developing funding to support that campaign. 8AP has taken on the role of finding new funding
streams for the movement, and is working to develop a strategy to sustain funding to abolish the death
penalty. 8AP also offers guidance to funders about how to align their investments with the national strategy
and maximize their impact.
Finally, 8AP revises, adjusts, and adapts the national strategy based on input from the movement. Flexibility
is necessary because: activities that were effective one year can become out-of-date the next; litigation to the
Supreme Court exposes new legal claims; and political realities shift creating new opportunities or
foreclosing on those previously identified as viable. Our SCOTUS strategy reflects continuous re-assessment
of changes in the political landscape nationally and in the states. We determine whether the benchmarks
previously used to measure progress towards abolition need adjustment and evaluate anew the role and
structure of the 8AP campaign organization. Coordination will be critical to carrying out this five year plan
and achieving the six key outcomes necessary to advancing the strategy.
Conclusion
We are heartened by the numerous opportunities we see for advancing abolition of the death penalty on the
horizon. The investments made over the last decade in this movement have positioned us to be able to take
full advantage of political opportunities as they appear. Using the criteria we have laid out, we believe that
we are in position to be able to prioritize resources for maximum impact and effectiveness over the next
five years and bring us closer to our ultimate goal.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0