The Freedom From Religion Foundation has filed a brief before an appeals court to refute the state of Texas’ contention that a defendant’s religious beliefs can be taken into account when sentencing him to death.
The case is Davis v. Guerrero, which is before the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The petitioner, Irving Alvin Davis, was entitled to a sentencing hearing free of bias and prejudice, but the state of Texas fell short of that guarantee. Texas first introduced evidence that Davis, while in prison, read satanic literature, jotted notes and drawings, and briefly joined the Church of Satan. Texas then introduced generic evidence “that some members of the satanic religion advocate violence” and “that various people had committed murder and mutilation ‘in the name of Satan.’” Davis was a self-described Buddhist at the time of his crime and claims to have recently reverted to Buddhism.
That state-proffered stereotyping violates the First Amendment in three major ways, FFRF points out in its friend-of-the-court brief. Those three errors in sum cast serious doubt on the fairness of Davis’ sentencing.
First, the introduction of religious materials and broad statements about those materials to show bad character constitutes impermissible hostility toward religion in violation of the First Amendment’s Free Exercise Clause. Davis did not join the Church of Satan or read satanic material before his trial, so his crime could not have been in furtherance of the Church of Satan’s mission. Aware of this fact, Texas nevertheless introduced evidence of Davis’ more recent beliefs, then argued that he should die, rather than spending the rest of life in prison.
Second, inviting a jury to determine core tenets of a religion excessively entangles the government with that religion, violating the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. The First Amendment requires courts to decide criminal sentencing “without resolving underlying controversies over religious doctrine,” to quote the U.S. Supreme Court. Submitting warring interpretations of doctrine to a jury entangled the state courts with the Church of Satan and transformed Davis’ penalty hearing into a heresy trial — strictly forbidden by the First Amendment.
And third, the state’s evidence cited in the case is true of nearly any religion, and was introduced for shock value. Christianity and Islam boast over 1 billion adherents each and have had countless acts of violence committed in furtherance of those faiths. It would be inappropriate for any prosecution to bring up those acts of violence and a Muslim or Christian’s affiliation with a specific church or masjid to conclude that members of that house of worship are likely to be dangerous in the future. And yet, Texas was not even this specific. The state’s expert witness did not recount a notable instance of violence done by a member of the Church of Satan.
For all these reasons, Davis’ death sentence should be vacated, the Freedom From Religion Foundation contends.
The FFRF brief can be read in full here.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation’s purposes are to educate the public about nontheism and to preserve the cherished constitutional principle of separation between religion and government. FFRF works as an umbrella for those who are free from religion (freethinkers, atheists, agnostics, and nonbelievers). FFRF currently has over 42,000 U.S. members and several chapters throughout the country, including more than 1,800 members and a chapter in Texas.
Government-sponsored hostility toward a religion, or those without religion, undermines the constitutional guarantee that church and state be separate. Our judicial system cannot mistreat parties simply because they are members of a minority religion, viewed unfavorably by the majoritarian religion. FFRF does not support or endorse the Church of Satan. But its adherents are afforded constitutional protection under the First Amendment.
The post FFRF amicus appeals court brief charges religious bias in death penalty case appeared first on Freedom From Religion Foundation.
