From The Rutherford Institute <[email protected]>
Subject Broken Justice: U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Address Racial Bias & Systemic Injustice That Contributed to Hispanic Inmate’s Death Sentence
Date November 21, 2019 4:39 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
Chronic injustice has turned the American dream into a nightmare

View this email in your browser ([link removed])
[link removed]



** For Immediate Release: November 21, 2019
------------------------------------------------------------


** Broken Justice: U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Address Racial Bias & Systemic Injustice That Contributed to Hispanic Inmate’s Death Sentence
------------------------------------------------------------

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review the case of a Hispanic man who was sentenced to death—and subsequently subjected to eight years of solitary confinement for up to 22 hours a day, which is tantamount to physical torture—based on an expert witness’ racist testimony suggesting that Hispanics pose a greater danger to society than other individuals ([link removed]) . The Rutherford Institute had asked the Supreme Court to address the many failings of America’s capital punishment system, epitomized by the case of Victor Hugo Saldaño (Saldaño v. Davis), whose death sentence and lengthy solitary confinement in Texas were allegedly the result of racial bias, mental incompetence and systemic injustice.

“Chronic injustice has turned the American dream into a nightmare,” said constitutional attorney John W. Whitehead, president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People ([link removed]) . “At every step along the way, whether it’s encounters with the police, dealings with prosecutors, hearings in court before judges and juries, jail terms in one of the nation’s many prisons, or death sentences handed out without any attempt at impartiality, the system is riddled with corruption, abuse and an appalling disregard for the rights of the citizenry.”
MAKE THE GOVERNMENT PLAY BY THE RULES OF THE CONSTITUTION: SUPPORT THE FIGHT FOR FREEDOM ([link removed])

Victor Saldaño, a citizen of Argentina, was charged in Texas with shooting a man in the course of a robbery. After Saldaño was convicted of murder, a separate court proceeding was held to determine whether the death penalty should be imposed. During the penalty phase of the trial, the state presented the testimony of a psychologist who told the jury that Hispanics and blacks pose a greater danger to the public and so posed the kind of future danger that justified imposing the death penalty. On the basis of that racist testimony, the jury sentenced Saldaño to death. He subsequently appealed, asserting that the psychologist’s testimony violated his constitutional right not to be sentenced on the basis of his race.

Although the state defended the sentence for four years on appeal, it eventually admitted to the U.S. Supreme Court that the psychologist’s testimony was improper, and the case was remanded for a new sentencing hearing. However, the Texas courts were unwilling to accept the state’s admission of error, leaving the case to drag on. In the meantime, Saldaño was placed in solitary confinement in Texas’ notoriously severe death-row prison and remained there for nearly eight years until a federal court ordered that he be granted a resentencing hearing. By that time, Saldaño’s mental health had deteriorated so severely due to the conditions of his confinement that he had become mentally incapacitated and was incapable of defending himself. Despite his family’s request that he be moved into a federal psychiatric institution, Saldaño was again sentenced to death, largely due to his erratic behavior in the courtroom. On appeal, Saldaño’s attorneys argued that his extended stay in solitary confinement
contributed to the mental deterioration that was the basis for his death sentence, thereby violating the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.

In its amicus brief ([link removed]) asking the U.S. Supreme Court to vacate Saldaño’s death sentence, The Rutherford Institute expanded on the Eighth Amendment argument, detailing the dehumanizing effects of and psychological harm caused by solitary confinement and arguing that Saldaño should not be put to death because of a condition the state itself caused.

Affiliate attorney Christopher Moriarty assisted in advancing the arguments in The Rutherford Institute’s amicus brief in Saldaño v. Davis ([link removed]) .

The Rutherford Institute, a nonprofit civil liberties organization, provides legal assistance at no charge to individuals whose constitutional rights have been threatened or violated.

This press release is also available at www.rutherford.org ([link removed]) .

Source: [link removed]
[link removed] Share ([link removed])
[link removed] https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fbroken-justice-us-supreme-court-refuses-to-address-racial-bias-systemic-injustice-that-contributed-to-hispanic-inmates-death-sentence Tweet ([link removed] https%3A%2F%2Fmailchi.mp%2Frutherford%2Fbroken-justice-us-supreme-court-refuses-to-address-racial-bias-systemic-injustice-that-contributed-to-hispanic-inmates-death-sentence)
[link removed] Forward ([link removed])
CLICK HERE TO MAKE A TAX-DEDUCTIBLE DONATION ([link removed])

To donate via PayPal, please click below:
[link removed]

============================================================
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Facebook ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** Follow us on Twitter ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
** YouTube ([link removed])
CONTACT INFORMATION
Nisha Whitehead
(434) 978-3888 ext. 604
** [email protected] (mailto:[email protected])

THE RUTHERFORD INSTITUTE
Post Office Box 7482
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
Phone: (434) 978-3888
** www.rutherford.org ([link removed])

Copyright © 2019 The Rutherford Institute, All rights reserved.

You are receiving this email because of your interest in the work of The Rutherford Institute. Founded in 1982 by constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead, The Rutherford Institute is a civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to people whose constitutional and human rights have been threatened or violated. To discontinue your membership electronically, or if you feel you are receiving this message in error, please follow the link below.

Under the regulations of the United States Internal Revenue Service, The Rutherford Institute is incorporated as a 501(c)(3) tax exempt nonprofit organization. Donations to support The Rutherford Institute’s legal and educational work help to safeguard the constitutional rights of all Americans. Donations are tax-deductible. In compliance with general industry standards of a nonprofit organization, the Institute is audited annually by an independent accounting firm.

** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])

** update subscription preferences ([link removed])
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis