logo
The Atlantic 's July Cover Story: Elizabeth Bruenig's 'Witness,' on Sin and Redemption in America's Death Chambers

The Atlantic 's July Cover Story: Elizabeth Bruenig's 'Witness,' on Sin and Redemption in America's Death Chambers

Yahoo3 hours ago

The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here.
'Capital punishment operates according to an emotional logic,' staff writer Elizabeth Bruenig writes in her July cover story for The Atlantic. 'Vengeance is elemental. Injustice cries out for redress. Murder is the most horrifying of crimes, and it seems only fitting to pair it with the most horrifying of punishments.' But as a Christian—embracing the doctrine that we're all sinners in need of redemption—Bruenig explains that she is interested in forgiveness and mercy, which are 'some of my faith's most stringent dictates. If those forms of compassion are possible for murderers, then they're possible for everyone.' For her first Atlantic cover story, Bruenig draws on the past five years of her reporting on death row. Bruenig has witnessed five executions of death-row inmates, and has also helped bring attention to the prevalence of botched executions: that is, the seeming inability of executioners in some states to kill the condemned humanely. Further, she has formed relationships, even friendships, with prisoners awaiting execution. In 2023, Bruenig was named a Pulitzer finalist for her reporting on Alabama's death row. Alabama has now banned Bruenig from its prisons. In an editor's note to lead the issue, also published today, The Atlantic's editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, writes that Bruenig 'possesses an almost-otherworldly toughness that has allowed her to witness, again and again, the unnatural act of state-sanctioned killing,' adding that Bruenig 'does not flinch from any of the ugliness of capital punishment, and, crucially, she does not flinch from the appalling crimes committed by so many of the men on death row.' Goldberg continues: 'For understandable reasons, people turn away from the subject of capital punishment. But Liz has done a remarkable thing here—she has written a propulsive narrative about redemption and sin and invested her story with humanity and grace.' Also accompanying the article is a series of original paintings by The Atlantic's creative director, Peter Mendelsund, including a striking cover image of a corridor leading to an execution chamber, and a prisoner lying on the table within it. When she witnessed her first execution, Bruenig writes: 'The only certainty I had going into the Indiana death chamber in December 2020 was the simple sense that it's generally wrong to kill people, even bad people. What I witnessed on this occasion and the ones that came after has not changed my conviction that capital punishment must end. But in sometimes-unexpected ways, it has changed my understanding of why.' Bruenig writes that 'capital punishment as an institution relies on judgment at every level: judgment about guilt, about fairness, about proportion, about pain and cruelty, about the possibility of redemption. Judgment about how to carry out a death sentence and how to behave as one does so. And then there is the judgment that must be directed at oneself and one's community—the distant, sometimes-forgotten participants. In all of this, I see the arc of my own evolving comprehension.' The cover story also addresses how these questions have touched her own family's life: When Bruenig's sister-in-law was murdered, nearly a decade ago, her husband and father-in-law both stood opposed to the death penalty. (The killer was ultimately sentenced to 40 years in prison.) 'Choosing mercy is the moral path even in the hardest cases—even if you believe that some people deserve execution,' Bruenig writes, 'and even if you know for a fact that the person in question is guilty and unrepentant.' She writes: 'To default to mercy is to impose limitations on one's own power to retaliate, and to acknowledge our flawed nature. To a Christian, mercy derives from charity. And in the liminal space where families of murder victims are recruited into the judicial process—to either bless or condemn a prosecutor's intentions—­showing mercy is an especially heroic decision. To think this way is to understand that the moral dimension of capital punishment is not just about what we do to others. It's also about what we do to ourselves.' Elizabeth Bruenig's '' was published today at TheAtlantic.com. Please reach out with any questions or requests to interview Bruenig on her reporting. Press contacts: Anna Bross and Paul Jackson | The Atlantic press@theatlantic.com
Article originally published at The Atlantic

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Russia Won't End Ukraine War Until NATO 'Pulls Out' of Baltics: Moscow
Russia Won't End Ukraine War Until NATO 'Pulls Out' of Baltics: Moscow

Newsweek

time34 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Russia Won't End Ukraine War Until NATO 'Pulls Out' of Baltics: Moscow

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Ukraine war won't end until NATO withdraws troops from the Baltics, a top Russian official has warned. Sergei Ryabkov, Russia's deputy foreign minister responsible for U.S. relations, nonproliferation and arms control, made the remarks in an interview with state-run news agency Tass. Newsweek has reached out to the Kremlin and NATO for comment by email. Why It Matters Ryabkov's comments mark a shift in the Kremlin's position. He suggested that the conflict's roots lie not only in Ukraine itself but in NATO's eastward expansion. According to Ryabkov, the withdrawal of NATO forces from the Baltics would help bring an end to the war. What To Know NATO maintains a strong military presence in the Baltic States, with multinational battle groups and brigades stationed in Bulgaria, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Slovakia. The military alliance bolstered its presence in the region in the wake of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. It said in an update on June 6 that the eight battle groups "demonstrate the strength of the trans-Atlantic bond and the Alliance's solidarity, determination and ability to respond to any aggression." Also, Sweden and Finland have switched from being neutral to joining NATO since the invasion. The Kremlin had said Ukraine must abandon its ambitions to join NATO as a condition for ending the war, but Ryabkov appeared to signal to Tass that the alliance must withdraw completely from the Baltics as well. In the article titled "Deputy Foreign Minister Ryabkov: It is impossible to resolve the conflict until NATO pulls out," the official argued that resolving the conflict in Ukraine requires addressing what he described as the root causes. "The American side requires practical steps aimed at eliminating the root causes of the fundamental contradictions between us in the area of security. "Among these causes, NATO expansion is in the foreground. Without resolving this fundamental and most acute problem for us, it is simply impossible to resolve the current conflict in the Euro-Atlantic region." Ryabkov suggested NATO's eastward expansion was central to the war. "Given the nature and genesis of the Ukrainian crisis, provoked by the previous U.S. authorities and the West as a whole, this conflict naturally acts, well, if you like, as a test, a trial, which checks the seriousness of Washington's intentions to straighten out our relations," he said. Last month, three Russian sources with knowledge of Washington-led negotiations told Reuters that Putin's conditions for ending the Ukraine war include a written pledge from Western leaders to halt NATO's eastward expansion. What People Are Saying A senior Russian source with knowledge of top-level Kremlin thinking told Reuters in an article published on May 28: "Putin is ready to make peace but not at any price." A second source told Reuters: "Putin has toughened his position." Sergei Ryabkov, Russia's deputy foreign minister, told Tass: "Trump's return to the White House, declaring his commitment to a political and diplomatic settlement of the Ukrainian crisis, has become a reason for cautious optimism in terms of a potential normalization of relations with the United States, but also in a broader sense. "It was in this vein that the presidents of Russia and the United States held four telephone conversations. Our side expressed gratitude for the United States' support in resuming direct negotiations between Russia and Ukraine, interrupted by the Ukrainian side in 2022. "But Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin also confirmed the basic principle of the need to eliminate the root causes of the conflict within the framework of political and diplomatic efforts. Otherwise, long-term peace cannot be ensured, and in concrete terms, it is necessary to exclude any opportunity for the Ukrainian Armed Forces to take advantage of the pause for a respite and regroup their forces." What Happens Next Moscow and Kyiv will continue to launch strikes on each other's territory, with the war in Ukraine showing few signs of a peace deal in the near future.

Wilmington City Council pushes for later last call, plus a local cigarette tax
Wilmington City Council pushes for later last call, plus a local cigarette tax

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Wilmington City Council pushes for later last call, plus a local cigarette tax

This story was produced by Spotlight Delaware as part of a partnership with Delaware Online/The News Journal. For more about Spotlight Delaware, visit The Wilmington City Council signed off on two new proposals Thursday that officials say would boost revenue for the city and improve its nightlife scene. In a pair of new resolutions introduced by City Councilman Coby Owens (D-1st District), the city is asking state legislators to grant Wilmington the authority to impose a local tax on cigarette sales, and to extend alcohol service at bars and restaurants until 2 a.m. – a full hour later than the state's current 1 a.m. cutoff. Owens said his proposal to extend 'last call' could bring more dollars into the city by boosting business revenue and attracting more visitors and young professionals to stay in the city. 'We must seize this opportunity to showcase Wilmington as a dynamic destination where people can come and spend their money and spend their time,' Owens said during Thursday's council meeting. WHAT ELSE HAPPENED AT THE MEETING: What's next for Wilmington renters after council rejects stabilization? Delaware is the only state in the mid-Atlantic region that cuts off alcohol service before the standard 2 a.m. last call. As Wilmington looks for ways to boost its appeal to young workers, it faces competition from neighboring states such as Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Maryland, and Washington, D.C. — all of which allow bars and restaurants to serve alcohol later into the night, with some cities in the region extending last call to as late as 3 a.m. Owens said he has been in communication with various businesses and young professionals who want more to do in the city. He also created a petition to gather support for the resolution, which currently has over 230 signatures. Owen's proposal could boost city revenue by increasing collections from various taxes, including Wilmington's wage tax. But, it is unclear if any increase would make more than a marginal difference in the city's budget. Councilman Nathan Field (D-8th District) asked Owens to hold the resolution for further discussion after noting that residents in his district, which encompasses the lively bar strip in Trolley Square along with neighboring areas like Forty Acres and the Highlands, have raised concerns about activity outside of the bars in the area after midnight. 'Why use one of our chips with Dover on an ask or suggest to them that we want this when it's not clear that city residents want this?' Field said. Councilmembers Michelle Harlee (D-4th District) and Alexander Hackett (D-At-Large) also voiced concerns around whether the measure had enough support from residents and emphasized the need for public safety initiatives to ensure safe driving. Councilwoman Zanthia Oliver (D-3rd District), who supports the measure, said she passed a similar resolution last year, but couldn't find a state legislator who wanted to take the proposal to Dover. The council ultimately approved the resolution with seven members voting in favor. Field voted against it, while Harlee and Councilwoman Latisha Bracy did not take a stance. Councilmembers Shané Darby, Chris Johnson, and James Spadola were absent. The City Council also passed Owens' resolution asking lawmakers in Dover to allow Wilmington to create an excise tax on cigarettes. The state currently taxes wholesalers who sell cigarettes to retailers at $2.10 for a 20-pack of cigarettes. The resolution passed with nine in favor, while Darby, Oliver, Johnson, and Spadola were absent. The city must now secure state lawmakers to sponsor the proposals and introduce them to the General Assembly. Get stories like this delivered to your email inbox by signing up for the free newsletter at This article originally appeared on Delaware News Journal: Wilmington City Council pushing for later last call for local bars

The Trump Administration's Nasty Campaign Against Trans People
The Trump Administration's Nasty Campaign Against Trans People

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

The Trump Administration's Nasty Campaign Against Trans People

The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. Last year, Donald Trump's presidential campaign notoriously made transgender issues a centerpiece of its charge that Democrats were out of touch with Middle America. The Trump team focused on matters where liberal activists and politicians had taken deeply unpopular stances: They would allow biological males in women's sports; Trump wouldn't. They supported medical transition for minors; he didn't. But in office, the Trump administration has gone far beyond those positions, issuing a series of executive orders and official statements that depict trans people as innately deluded, duplicitous, or dishonorable. The cumulative effect is to portray anyone who is gender-nonconforming as a traitor. 'NO MORE DRAG SHOWS, OR OTHER ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA,' Trump posted on Truth Social when he took over the Kennedy Center, in Washington, D.C. Look at the language of one of Trump's early executive orders, which prohibits trans people from serving in the military. The 'adoption of a gender identity inconsistent with an individual's sex conflicts with a soldier's commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle, even in one's personal life,' a January 27 order declares. (Early last month, the Supreme Court allowed the ban on transgender soldiers to stand while legal challenges against it run their course.) More recently, the Trump confidante Laura Loomer has called for the firing of transgender government employees, including one she described on X as a 'Biden holdover.' This is noteworthy because Loomer's other personnel interventions appear to have been successful; six officials were fired from the National Security Council in April, apparently at her request. Loomer's animus against gender nonconformity is so strong that she has clashed with other MAGA darlings. She recently challenged Trump's nominee for surgeon general, Casey Means, to 'condemn' her own father, Grady, for having written a children's book about a flamboyant flamingo exploring its identity. When I asked Loomer by text why she opposed trans people working in national-security roles, she replied: 'Transgenderism is a mental disorder. It's important that only people of sound mind work in positions of national security. It would be reckless to appoint or allow transgenders to work at the NSC, given the fact that transgenderism is body dysmorphia, which is a mental disorder.' [Helen Lewis: The Democrats need an honest conversation on gender identity] The straightforwardly antagonistic tone in Trump's orbit represents a big shift since his first presidential campaign, when he said that North Carolina's so-called bathroom bill had gone too far and repulsed voters, and that Caitlyn Jenner, the Olympic champion and reality-TV star who'd publicly transitioned the year before, was welcome to use whichever bathroom she liked at Trump Tower. In the second Trump term, however, gratuitous rudeness toward transgender Americans has become normalized. Representative Sarah McBride, the first openly trans member of Congress, has been repeatedly referred to by some of her fellow lawmakers as 'the gentleman from Delaware' and 'Mr. McBride.' No doubt the people doing this see it as a punkish political statement. To me, they just seem pointlessly rude. My conclusion might strike some trans-rights advocates as incongruous. I have previously argued against the inclusion of biological males in women's sports and expressed skepticism of poorly evidenced treatments in youth gender medicine. I don't believe that male rapists and killers who say they are trans belong in women's jails—as California and some other jurisdictions decree. That creates an unacceptable risk to female prisoners. But understanding that women's rights sometimes conflict with those of males who identify as women is not the same as thinking that a lot of ordinary Americans are innately predatory or degenerate just because they are transgender. Adults should have broad latitude to make decisions about their own body, yet Republicans in Congress are considering the withdrawal of Medicaid funding for all hormonal and surgical gender treatments, not just those for minors. If you're skeptical of people who put their pronouns in their email signatures, feel free to roll your eyes—We could have guessed you're a man, Steve—while understanding that the gesture might be meaningful to them. Barring federal workers from including their pronouns, as this administration has done, is just as illiberal as mandating pronoun inclusion. Trump's actions on trans policies reflect a pattern across the administration of chaotic executive orders, inflammatory language, and counterproductive decisions. European reviews have found that American child gender-medicine practices far outstrip the available evidence for their safety and efficacy. But the Trump administration isn't helping convince the champions of puberty blockers to reconsider. When the Department of Health and Human Services commissioned a balanced, well-evidenced report suggesting caution in child gender medicine, the administration preempted its release by calling the practice 'chemical and surgical mutilation.' The White House's emotive language duly gave liberals—along with the medical associations who were criticized by the report—permission to ignore the findings. [Adam Serwer: The attack on trans rights won't end there] Even policies that may be defensible in substance have been carried out with a level of haste that seems vindictive. In January, Trump issued an executive order declaring that there are only two sexes, and that they are fixed at birth. (Most Americans agree with these statements.) Yet the consequences of this executive order have been to throw trans Americans' legal status into confusion: In February, the Euphoria star Hunter Schafer, a trans woman, revealed that her passport had been returned to her with the sex marker changed to 'Male.' No support or explanation has been provided for people who have to navigate what this might mean for their travel abroad. Trump has also said that any athletes who have changed their legal documents from their birth sex will not be allowed into the United States to compete in the 2028 Olympics. More than that, such athletes could receive a lifetime visa ban—even though their home country might well recognize their legal gender. 'America categorically rejects transgender lunacy,' Trump said in February—hardly the kind of language that will convince liberals that his primary interest is fair competition in women's sports. Overall, these are the actions of an administration that wants to keep waging a polarized fight against a vilified enemy, not broker sensitive compromises that respect the dignity of a minority group. The same pattern is obvious in the scrapping of several grants by the National Institutes of Health whose abstracts used the word transgender. We need more research on gender-related medical treatments, for the simple reason that thousands of Americans have already been given them, with too little attention to their long-term outcomes. We don't need grant refusals so haphazard that you suspect that a 20-something coder has done a keyword search and defunded entire studies as a result. If artificial hormones are dangerous, as some MAGA influencers contend, why would the government cancel grants dedicated to studying their side effects? Similarly, the only conceivable reason to scrap an LGBTQ suicide hotline is gratuitous meanness. The most recent Pew Research Center survey shows that 77 percent of Americans believe that discrimination against trans people exists, including 63 percent of Republican-leaning people. Waging all-out war on transgender Americans is just as out of touch with popular opinion as supporting routine mastectomies for troubled teenagers. [Helen Lewis: The push for puberty blockers got ahead of the research] One very good reason for the Democrats to retreat from their unpopular, maximalist Joe Biden–era positions on this issue is that they could then oppose the Trump administration's overtly cruel decisions. At the moment, the entire party is paralyzed about the topic, unwilling to go against its loudest activists while also reluctant to endorse those activists' demands. California Governor Gavin Newsom, for example, is now on the record opposing trans athletes in girls' sports, but the practice is still legal in his state—and drawing both grassroots protests and threats from Trump. 'Many in the Democratic coalition share, if only among close and trusted friends, the sense that we are walking on eggshells,' Jonathan Cowan, of the advocacy group Third Way, wrote in Politico late last month, adding: 'That silence is proving a political disaster.' As it stands, Democrats are neither being honest with voters that they went too far before nor opposing the Trump administration's overreach in the opposite direction. It should be possible to express concern about trans-rights groups' most dogmatic positions without being shouted down. But that does not also mean signing up to the premise that transgender Americans are inherently unworthy of basic respect. Under Biden, the left went too far into bad and unpopular gender-identity policies. Under Trump, the same is true of the right. Article originally published at The Atlantic

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store