Legislation would extend review period between death warrant and execution
Four years after state lawmakers failed to pass legislation to abolish the death penalty, despite having a Democratic trifecta, a bill this year would extend the time period for carrying out a potential execution.
Nevada law currently calls for an execution to take place between 60 and 90 days after an execution is warranted.
Senate Bill 350, sponsored by Democratic state Sen. James Ohrenschall of Las Vegas, would lengthen the timeframe to between 180 and 270 days.
Ohrenschall said he 'personally doesn't support the death penalty' and would rather see it abolished.
There have been 23 states that have abolished the death penalty, citing concerns including but not limited to racial disparities in the number of death row inmates, the high costs of capital cases going to trial, and documented likely instances of people being put to death after wrongful convictions, as well as people being exonerated while on death row.
The legislation seeks to ensure attorneys have an adequate amount of time to litigate any issues that arise once an execution is ordered, Ohrenschall said.
The legislation would also ensure that there is only one execution warrant that would be pending in Nevada at any given time.
'In Nevada, unlike other states, an execution warrant is issued by the district judge in the county where the conviction occurred,' said David Anthony, an attorney who specializes in capital cases who alongside Ohrenschall described the bill to a legislative panel. 'In many other states, execution warrants are issued by a single entity.'
The bill passed out of the Senate April 21 on a 13-8 party-line vote. The legislation was heard Wednesday by the Assembly Judiciary Committee.
Nevada hasn't executed anyone since 2006. The state tried, and failed, to execute Scott Dozier in 2017. A lengthy legal battle over the drugs being used to kill Dozier resulted in the execution being postponed until he died by suicide in early 2019.
Ohrenschall, along with Democratic Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager, both introduced separate bills in 2021 to abolish the state's death penalty.
Former Democratic Gov. Steve Sisolak said at the time he had a 'hard time with the idea of a complete abolition' and thought executions should be reserved for extreme cases.
Despite uncertainty on whether Sisolak would sign a bill abolishing the death penalty, the Nevada Assembly voted 26-16 in a party line vote to advance Yeager's bill.
The legislation then stalled in the Senate Judiciary Committee and died without getting another vote.
Anthony said SB 350 represented 'a common sense reform that helps bring the law into conformity with what the actual practice is in litigating capital cases.'
While there are ways for people to appeal their cases and delay their execution, 'there are certain constitutional rights that cannot be litigated until there is an execution warrant,' he said.
The bill, Anthony said, would also give the Nevada Department of Corrections additional time to complete all the protocols statutorily required prior to an execution, including mental health evaluations and health exams.
NDOCDirector James Dzurenda told lawmakers Wednesday the logistics of training staff, notifying victims and procuring the drugs for an execution is hard to accomplish in a short time period.
The logistics for planning more than one execution concurrently would be 'a nightmare process for corrections,' he added.
'What we do is we prepare,' Dzurenda said. 'Even right now we are preparing for an execution in case we get one next week. That's a lot of wasted taxpayer money. If we had an extension at the beginning of an execution we could prepare when we get a warrant. Right now we have to prepare before we get a warrant.'
There are currently 59 people on death row in Nevada according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
But Dzurenda also said that if the timeframe is extended 'too much could actually hurt the process' and opens the possibility for 'appeals that may not have been necessary in my eyes or get these far fetched appeals that could stretch out an execution.'
Similar to efforts to get rid of the death penalty, the Nevada District Attorneys Association opposed efforts to change the timeframe for carrying out executions.
Jennifer Noble, a lobbyist with the association who testified against the bill Wednesday, said there is already a lengthy and robust process for people to challenge and appeal their guilty verdict as well as the death sentence.
'This bill will not make anything easier on victims,' Noble said.
Nevada Attorneys for Criminal Justice, in a letter supporting Ohrenschall's legislation, wrote it wouldn't lead to unnecessary delays but 'rather reflect the time actually needed to ensure due process at a time when the stakes could not be higher.'
Mark Bettencourt, the executive director with the Nevada Coalition Against the Death Penalty, said while the coalition was still pursuing an end to the death penalty, the legislation was a 'common sense bill' to ensure that if an execution was carried out it wasn't rushed.
'It's been almost 20 years since we've had an execution in this state,' he said. 'To rush that now risks a botched execution and taking the life of an innocent person.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Zohran Mamdani mentions Andrew Cuomo in same breath as Jeffrey Epstein in new video
Mayoral front-runner Zohran Mamdani is going nuclear on rival Andrew Cuomo — attempting to link the ex-governor to Jeffrey Epstein in a new scorched-earth campaign video. In the 90-second TikTok-style spot, Mamdani, looking into the camera, demands that Cuomo release his list of consulting clients, noting the ex-gov once worked on a luxury marina project with a pal, Andrew Farkas, whose former business partner was Epstein. 'In June, the New York Times found out that Cuomo worked with his longtime friend Andrew Farkas on a luxury marina project in Puerto Rico. Farkas' previous partner on Caribbean luxury marinas was none other than Jeffrey Epstein,' Mamdani says. 8 Democratic mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani released a scathing new attack ad against his rival former Gov. Andrew Cuomo. YouTube/@ZohranforNYC 8 The video lists of a number of alleged scandals involving the ex-governor — even linking him to Jeffrey Epstein. SARAH YENESEL/EPA/Shutterstock The mud-slinging from Mamdani comes days after Cuomo hammered the socialist for snagging a $2,300 rent-stabilized apartment in Astoria despite his family's apparent wealth. Cuomo even proposed 'Zohran's Law' to prevent well-to-do residents from obtaining rent-restricted apartments. The new spot starts with Mamdani noting that Cuomo 'resigned in disgrace and you probably know why' — then shows footage and articles about women who accused the then-gov of sexual misconduct and the controversy surrounding his nursing home policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Democratic mayoral nominee demands that Cuomo release the list of clients from the consulting firm he launched in 2022 after he exited the governor's office, Innovative Strategies LLC. Mamdani gripes in the video that Cuomo has not divulged who paid him. But published reports have said Cuomo worked for a crypto currency exchange based in the Seychelles that eventually pleaded guilty to operating illegally in the US. The Democratic socialist Queens assemblyman also notes that Cuomo did not initially disclose $2.6 million in stock options from a nuclear company to the New York City Conflicts of Interest Board. 8 The ad mentions that Cuomo worked on a luxury marina project in Puerto Rico with friend Andrew Farkas — who was a business partner with Epstein. New York State Sex Offender Registry via AP 8 Mamdani's ad highlights a Bloomberg article showing a link between Epstein and Farkas. YouTube/@ZohranforNYC 'His excuse? The stocks were technically owned by Innovation Strategies LLC – where Cuomo is the sole member,' Mamdani says. 'That's the thing about Andrew Cuomo: once you think you've learned all the scandals, you find out there's another. And another. And another. ' Cuomo can clear the air, Mamdani says, adding: 'Habibi – release your client list.' 8 A photo of Cuomo with Farkas shown in the Mamdani ad. YouTube/@ZohranforNYC A rep for Cuomo gleefully responded that they could 'smell the desperation from conspiracy peddling' in Mamdani's attack. '[Cuomo] didn't know Epstein, but you can smell the desperation from conspiracy peddling Zohran,' said Cuomo campaign spokesman Richard Azzopardi. The former governor — who is running as an independent in the November election after getting soundly bested by Mamdani in the Democratic primary — also has vehemently denied he sexually harassed anyone. 8 Mamdani also bashed Cuomo over his COVID-19 book scandal. YouTube/@ZohranforNYC One campaign strategist said Mamdani's ad was a 'gutsy move' — and likely a response to Cuomo scoring points by hitting him for his rent-stabilized apartment. 'It's a gutsy move. Mamdani is defining Cuomo to general election voters on his terms,' said O'Brien 'OB' Murray, who has run campaigns for Republicans and Democrats. He said Mamdani is not leaving it to campaign surrogates to do the dirty work and is willing to go toe-to-toe with Cuomo. 8 Mamdani also took a shot at Cuomo's performance in the city's Democratic mayoral primary. YouTube/@ZohranforNYC 'It's a page out of Donald Trump's playbook. When the candidates say something about an opponent, voters pay attention to it,' Murray said. But Mamdani risks 'tarnishing' his image by getting in the mud with Cuomo, even if he wants to keep the focus on the ex-gov's past scandals, said Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist University Institute for Public Opinion. 'The Cuomo people are probably happy to draw a response. They want to engage Mamdani,' Miringoff said. 'Zohran risks tarnishing his image.' 8 Mamdani called on Cuomo to release the list of clients involved with his consulting firm Innovative Strategies LLC. YouTube/@ZohranforNYC Azzopardi dismissed the video as 'nothing more than a temper tantrum from an insecure child of privilege who knows his tenuous lead is slipping away.' He said the project in question with Farkas never got off the ground, and in regards to his consultancy business, Cuomo does not comment on those 'private client matters' and has not represented anyone with business before a New York city or state agency. Azzopardi also said the stock options were publicly disclosed in Federal Communication Commission files for years. 'There was a question about if and how they were required to be disclosed on city filings, which, after consulting with the Conflict of Interest board, we corrected the same day the matter was brought to our attention,' the Cuomo rep said. 'Try as he might, Zohran can't distract from the rank hypocrisy of growing up wealthy, owning hundreds of thousands of dollars of land in a country that has the death penalty for LGBTQIA people and making more than $140k a year for a job he doesn't show up to while taking a rent stabilized apartment meant for a working New Yorker, not to mention his flip flopping on the defund the police and supporting pro-Hamas criminals like the Holy Land Five,' Azzopardi said. 'He's a total fraud and with every passing day New Yorkers see it.'
Scientific American
27 minutes ago
- Scientific American
Trump Order Gives Political Appointees Vast Powers over Research Grants
US President Donald Trump issued an expansive executive order (EO) yesterday that would centralize power and upend the process that the US government has used for decades to award research grants. If implemented, political appointees — not career civil servants, including scientists — would have control over grants, from initial funding calls to final review. This is the Trump administration's latest move to assert control over US science. The EO, titled 'Improving Oversight of Federal Grantmaking', orders each US agency head to designate an appointee to develop a grant-review process that will 'advance the President's policy priorities'. Those processes must not fund grants that advance 'anti-American values' and instead prioritize funding for institutions committed to achieving Trump's plan for 'gold-standard science'. (That plan, issued in May, calls for the US government to promote 'transparent, rigorous, and impactful' science, but has been criticized for its potential to increase political interference in research.) Impacts might be felt immediately: the latest order directs US agencies, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to halt new funding opportunities, which are calls for researchers to submit applications for grants on certain topics. They will be paused until agencies put their new review processes in place. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Trump's EO comes after the US Senate — which, along with the House, ultimately controls US government spending — has, in recent weeks, mostly rejected his proposals to slash the federal budget for science, totalling nearly US$200 billion annually. The White House did not respond to questions from Nature about the EO. Negative reaction Trump, a Republican, has previously used EOs, which can direct government agencies but cannot alter existing laws, to effect policy change. In January, on his first day in office, he signed a slew of EOs with wide-ranging effects, from pulling the United States out of the Paris climate agreement to cutting the federal workforce, which had included nearly 300,000 scientists before he took office. Scientists and policy specialists have lambasted the latest EO on social media. 'This is a shocking executive order that undermines the very idea of open inquiry,' Casey Dreier, director of space policy for the Planetary Society, an advocacy group in Pasadena, California, posted to Bluesky. Also on Bluesky, Jeremy Berg, a former director of the NIH's National Institute of General Medical Sciences, called it a 'power grab'. Speaking to Nature, he said: 'That power is something that has not been exercised at all in the past by political appointees.' In a statement, Zoe Lofgren, a Democratic member of the US House of Representatives from California, called the EO 'obscene'. It could lead to political appointees 'standing between you and a cutting-edge cancer-curing clinical trial', she said. The EO justifies the changes to the grant-awarding process by casting doubts on past choices: it accuses the US National Science Foundation (NSF) of awarding grants to educators with anti-American ideologies and to projects on diversity, equity and inclusion, which are disfavoured by the Trump team. It also points to senior researchers at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and Stanford University in California who have resigned over accusations of data falsification. To 'strengthen oversight' of grants, the EO imposes several restrictions, including prohibiting grants that promote 'illegal immigration' and prohibiting grant recipients from promoting 'racial preferences' in their work or denying that sex is binary. In some cases, the restrictions seem to contradict Congressional mandates. For instance, the NSF has, for decades, been required by law to broaden participation in science of people from under-represented groups — an action that takes race into consideration. In addition to these broader restrictions, the EO directs grant approvals to prioritize certain research institutions, such as those that have 'demonstrated success' in implementing the gold-standard science plan and those with lower 'indirect costs'. As part of its campaign to downsize government spending and reduce the power of elite US universities, the Trump administration has repeatedly tried to cap these costs — used to pay for laboratory electricity and administrative staff, for instance. It has proposed a flat 15% rate for grants awarded by agencies such as the NSF and the US Department of Energy, but federal courts have so far blocked such policies. Some institutions with the highest indirect-cost rates are children's hospitals, Berg told Nature. 'Does that mean they're just not going to prioritize research at children's hospitals?' he asks. Out for review At the heart of the grant-awarding process is peer review. Project proposals have typically had to pass watchful panels of independent scientists who scored and approved funding. 'Nothing in this order shall be construed to discourage or prevent the use of peer review methods,' the EO notes, 'provided that peer review recommendations remain advisory' to the senior appointees. The EO worries many researchers, including Doug Natelson, a physicist at Rice University in Houston, Texas. 'This looks like an explicit attempt to destroy peer review for federal science grants,' he says. Programme officers at agencies, who have been stewards of the grant-review process, are similarly alarmed. 'The executive order is diminishing the role of programme officers and their autonomy to make judgments about the quality of the science,' says an NSF employee who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak with the press. 'That's disheartening, to say the least.'
New York Post
27 minutes ago
- New York Post
Democrat Sherrod Brown will attempt to win back his Senate seat in 2026: report
Democrat Sherrod Brown will attempt to win back his U.S. Senate seat in Ohio in next year's midterm elections, according to media reports, in a race that likely would pit him against Republican Senator John Husted as Democrats fight to win back control of the chamber. The media site reported that Brown will jump into the contest, citing unnamed Ohio labor leaders familiar with his thinking. Brown was not reachable for comment. 4 Democrat Sherrod Brown will attempt to win back his Senate seat in Ohio, reports say. The Washington Post via Getty Images 4 Sherrod Brown will challenge Senator Jon Husted who is one of Ohio's senators. CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images Brown, 72, served for 18 years in the Senate before he lost to Republican Bernie Moreno last November in a 50.1%-46.5% vote. Republicans currently hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and Ohio could become the site of one of a half-dozen most competitive races in next year's elections. Husted was appointed in January to temporarily fill the seat vacated by JD Vance when he became vice president. The winner of the November 2026 special election would serve the remainder of Vance's Senate term, ending in January 2029. Brown anchored his long congressional career as a dogged fighter for blue-collar workers in Ohio, which has suffered job losses as steel, automotive and other jobs moved abroad. 4 Sherrod Brown served in the Senate for 18 years before he lost his seat. Getty Images 4 Republican Senator Jon Husted was appointed to fill the seat vacated by JD Vance when he became the vice president. Bloomberg via Getty Images Once a battlefield state, Ohio has leaned increasingly Republican over the past decade. Last November, Republican Donald Trump handily defeated Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris 55.2%-44% in Ohio, where he remains a potent political force. Both Brown and Husted would be favored to win their respective parties' primary races next year. After his defeat last November, Brown founded the Dignity of Work Institute, aimed at improving pay and benefits for working-class people.
