The Atlantic 's July Cover Story: Elizabeth Bruenig's 'Witness,' on Sin and Redemption in America's Death Chambers
'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
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
4 hours ago
- Atlantic
No, Democrats Don't Need Their Own Stephen Miller
This is an edition of 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. Do Democrats need their own Stephen Miller? That's what the Rolling Stone journalist Asawin Suebsaeng reports hearing from many people on the left. Imagining a progressive version of Donald Trump's far-right-hand man is hard enough, much less justifying why this might be a good thing. But the idea seems inevitable in a party that has already launched searches for a Democratic Joe Rogan, a Democratic Donald Trump, and a Democratic Project 2025. Even as voters keep telling pollsters that they find the Democratic Party inauthentic, some of its leaders are looking for cheap, left-of-center knockoffs of existing products. Growing numbers of voters disapprove of Trump, but they don't see Democrats as a viable alternative. The party's own voters describe it with terms such as ' weak ' and 'apathetic.' Americans tell pollsters that Democrats are 'more focused on helping other people than people like me.' In interviews and focus groups, they complain that Democrats have muddled messages or are talking down to them. The New York Times reports today that Democratic Party registration is losing ground to the GOP in the 30 states that track these numbers. The desire for a Miller Lite reveals Democrats' misunderstanding of their own problem. Democrats are facing a political challenge, as they struggle to communicate their goals to voters in an appealing way. But Miller hasn't been particularly successful at winning over voters. In fact, he's manifestly unappealing as a public figure and apparently as a colleague, to say nothing of his condiment preferences. Miller's own public approval rating is 11 points underwater, and as he's put his agenda into action, Trump keeps getting less popular, too. What makes Miller such an effective policy maven is his devotion to his worldview, and his willingness to sweep aside almost any barriers that might impede his ability to implement it—including public opposition. If Democrats actually got their hands on a Miller Lite, he might only make them less popular. Suebsaeng's account of what he's hearing exposes this muddled thinking. He writes that people don't 'want the mirror image of the lawlessness per se,' but they do desire someone 'willing to do or say anything and force practically the entire government even people who technically outrank him to violate laws and norms.' Some people might imagine that you could find a ruthless champion of liberal policy ideas without Miller's unfortunate tendency to run roughshod over the rules, but that's part of Miller's full package: He's able to succeed because he has little respect for them. Though a liberal equivalent might be able to drive through some policies, the cost of further destroying the rule of law would be an abandonment of the party's most basic values. Leftist authoritarianism with good health-care coverage is not an appealing alternative to Trumpism. It's Cuba. The search for Democratic dupes —pun very much intended—in other areas encounters similar challenges. 'The search for a liberal Joe Rogan has led Democrats to an unlikely candidate: Jaime Harrison, their former party chair,' Semafor reported last month. Quite unlikely, in fact. Harrison seems like a nice enough guy, which is perhaps one reason his new podcast hasn't found much audience in an ecosystem that values excitement and conflict. Another problem is the guest lineup, which is mostly Democratic politicians and also Hunter Biden. If Democrats think this is a response to Rogan, they're badly mistaken. Rogan is a podcaster who talks about politics, not a political podcaster. His appeal comes in part from his reputation as an everyman who is at least ostensibly open to persuasion. California Governor Gavin Newsom has created a lot of buzz in recent days for X posts from his press office that mimic the Trump style—ALL CAPS, stilted diction, memes, and more. This has had the effect of bringing attention to Gavin Newsom, and also of trolling a clueless Dana Perino. Overall, these posts have the form of a joke—it's recognizable to everyone but Perino as a burlesque—but they don't really have any humor. What political project they serve other than entrenching Trump's style is obscure. Some Democrats are also seeking to replicate the success of Project 2025, the Heritage Foundation-led plan that has been a blueprint for the Trump administration. Here, at least, they seem to be closer to thinking about comparisons with the GOP in a parallel way: Project 2025 has been successful because it is a policy document, not a piece of political strategy. It begins with a worldview—for a religious, traditionalist society—and only then lays out plans to achieve it. But The New York Times reports that the people behind ' Project 2029 ' are trying to gather a range of thinkers from across the Democratic spectrum, which risks producing a great deal of infighting about priorities, rather than a unified plan. During the Trump era, the GOP agenda has become flattened into whatever Donald Trump and influential advisers say it is. Other Republicans have either adjusted their views or left the party. A figure like Miller both creates and benefits from this uniformity. Democrats can't really replicate that. Their coalition is far more diverse, and there's no major ideological leader of the party, except Bernie Sanders, whose agenda most Democratic elected officials (and voters) don't subscribe to. (Both parties used to be much more ideologically heterogeneous than they are today, although the GOP coalition has narrowed faster than the Democratic one.) Democrats have a lot of policy ideas, some of them in conflict; the upside of a diverse coalition is lots of different approaches. Every time I hear about the quest for a 'liberal Joe Rogan,' I'm reminded of a passage by Ta-Nehisi Coates, who quoted Saul Bellow dismissing African culture by asking, 'Who is the Tolstoy of the Zulus?' In reply to Bellow, the journalist Ralph Wiley wrote, 'Tolstoy is the Tolstoy of the Zulus.' This is a lesson about universality, but it can also be a reminder of the value of producing your own ideas and work. Joe Rogan already exists; the left needs its own authentic voice, and he or she won't sound like Rogan. For Democrats, imitation is the sincerest forum for getting flattened. The Republican-controlled Texas House of Representatives began debating a redistricting proposal this morning that could deliver five additional U.S. House seats to the GOP—legislation that is expected to pass. U.S. and European military leaders have begun discussing postwar security guarantees for Ukraine, according to U.S. officials and sources. The White House said yesterday that Russian President Vladimir Putin has agreed to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, though the Kremlin has not yet confirmed a meeting. Evening Read A Tale of Sex and Intrigue in Imperial Kyoto By Lauren Groff In mid-April, I flew to Japan because I'd become obsessed with an 11th-century Japanese novel called The Tale of Genji. I also had a frantic longing to escape my country. At its best, literature is a way to loft readers so far above the burning present that we can see a vast landscape of time below us. From the clouds, we watch the cyclical turn of seasons and history, and can take a sort of bitter comfort in the fact that humans have always been a species that simply can't help setting our world on fire. I was bewildered that The Tale of Genji had such a hold on me at this particular moment: It is a wild, confounding work that many consider to be the first novel ever written, by a mysterious woman whose true name we'll never know, but whom we call Murasaki Shikibu, or Lady Murasaki. The novel is more than 1,000 pages long, more than 1,000 years old, and larded with enigmatic poetry. It's about people whose lives differ so much—in custom, religion, education, wealth, privilege, politics, hierarchy, aesthetics—from the lives of 21st-century Americans that most of their concerns have become nearly illegible to us through the scrim of time and language. Culture Break Watch. In 2020, Sophie Gilbert recommended 25 half-hour TV shows for anyone with a frazzled attention span.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Texas judge blocks Ten Commandments in public schools with epic ruling that quotes Sonny & Cher, Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Graham
A federal judge in Texas has temporarily blocked state law requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, setting up a possible Supreme Court showdown after several Republican-led states have tried, and failed, to implement similar laws. The Texas law, which was set to take effect September 1, likely violates the First Amendment's prohibitions against government interference and endorsement of religion, according to Tuesday's order from District Judge Fred Biery. His colorful 55-page ruling quotes from Sonny & Cher, Greta Garbo and Kurt Vonnegut as well as Supreme Court rulings, historians and prominent faith leaders, from Billy Graham and Pat Robertson to the Buddha. 'Ultimately, in matters of conscience, faith, beliefs and the soul, most people are Garbo-esque,' he wrote, referencing her line 'I want to be alone' from the film Grand Hotel. 'They just want to be left alone, neither proselytized nor ostracized, including what occurs to their children in government-run schools.' Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will appeal, his office told The Independent. Under legislation approved by Texas lawmakers and signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year, all public elementary or secondary schools must 'display in a conspicuous place in each classroom of the school a durable poster or framed copy of the Ten Commandments.' A lawsuit was filed by a group of Texas families with Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Unitarian Universalist, and nonreligious backgrounds, including clergy, with children in public schools. The judge agreed with plaintiffs that those displays 'are likely to pressure' children 'into religious observance, meditation on, veneration, and adoption' of the state's favored religious doctrine while 'suppressing expression of their own religious or nonreligious background and beliefs,' according to the judge. Biety also agreed that 'these matters of individual conscience and the soul should be free of government interference and coercion.' The Ten Commandment won't necessarily be taught in schools, but 'the captive audience of students likely would have questions, which teachers would feel compelled to answer,' according to the judge. 'Teenage boys, being the curious hormonally driven creatures they are, might ask: 'Mrs. Walker, I know about lying and I love my parents, but how do I do adultery?'' the judge wrote. 'Truly an awkward moment for overworked and underpaid educators, who already have to deal with sex education issues … and a classic example of the law of unintended consequences in legislative edicts.' Biety's ruling — which traces the history of religious observation and persecution— asks whether that 'violent history gives rise to the question: 'Haven't we evolved?''' 'Other than size and longevity, the answer clearly is: 'Of course not,'' he wrote, adding 'The Beat Goes On' — with a footnote referencing the song from Sonny & Cher. He notes that 'those who immigrated to Texas were neither the first nor the last group to come to America in search of freedom from government-controlled religion,' pointing to a long line of state-imposed persecution. 'So it goes,' he wrote — with another footnote referencing Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five. Rabbi Mara Nathan, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement that 'children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools.' Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said the ruling 'ensures that our clients' schools will remain spaces where all students, regardless of their faith, feel welcomed and can learn without worrying that they do not live up to the state's preferred religious beliefs.' In his conclusion, the judge offered an olive branch to his critics. 'For those who disagree with the Court's decision and who would do so with threats, vulgarities and violence, Grace and Peace unto you,' he wrote. 'May humankind of all faiths, beliefs and non-beliefs be reconciled one to another. Amen.' In a statement to The Independent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said 'the Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of our moral and legal heritage, and their presence in classrooms serves as a reminder of the values that guide responsible citizenship.' 'Texas will always defend our right to uphold the foundational principles that have built this nation, and I will absolutely be appealing this flawed decision,' he added. Lawmakers in Arkansas have advanced similar legislation, and Oklahoma's chief school officials mandated copies of the Bible and Ten Commandments in all classrooms with 'immediate and strict compliance.' Last year, District Judge John Wheadon deGravelles paused a similar Louisiana law that had swiftly drawn legal challenges from civil rights groups anticipating a Supreme Court battle. Legislation to incorporate Christian teachings in public schools joins a nationwide effort from conservative special interest groups to move public funds into religious education, dovetailing with efforts by Donald Trump's administration and across the country to let families use taxpayer funds to send their children to private schools. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court reached a surprise tie in a case that could decide whether Oklahoma could open the first-ever taxpayer funded Catholic public charter school, which triggered a high-profile legal battle to decide whether public funds can be used to create religious schools — setting up a major test to the First Amendment's establishment clause. The 4-4 decision, from which Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself, upheld a lower-court ruling that effectively blocked the school's opening — for now. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Texas judge blocks Ten Commandments in public schools with epic ruling that quotes Sonny & Cher, Kurt Vonnegut and Billy Graham
A federal judge in Texas has temporarily blocked state law requiring the Ten Commandments in every public school classroom, setting up a possible Supreme Court showdown after several Republican-led states have tried, and failed, to implement similar laws. The Texas law, which was set to take effect September 1, likely violates the First Amendment's prohibitions against government interference and endorsement of religion, according to Tuesday's order from District Judge Fred Biery. His colorful 55-page ruling quotes from Sonny & Cher, Greta Garbo and Kurt Vonnegut as well as Supreme Court rulings, historians and prominent faith leaders, from Billy Graham and Pat Robertson to the Buddha. 'Ultimately, in matters of conscience, faith, beliefs and the soul, most people are Garbo-esque,' he wrote, referencing her line 'I want to be alone' from the film Grand Hotel. 'They just want to be left alone, neither proselytized nor ostracized, including what occurs to their children in government-run schools.' Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton will appeal, his office told The Independent. Under legislation approved by Texas lawmakers and signed into law by Governor Greg Abbott earlier this year, all public elementary or secondary schools must 'display in a conspicuous place in each classroom of the school a durable poster or framed copy of the Ten Commandments.' A lawsuit was filed by a group of Texas families with Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Unitarian Universalist, and nonreligious backgrounds, including clergy, with children in public schools. The judge agreed with plaintiffs that those displays 'are likely to pressure' children 'into religious observance, meditation on, veneration, and adoption' of the state's favored religious doctrine while 'suppressing expression of their own religious or nonreligious background and beliefs,' according to the judge. Biety also agreed that 'these matters of individual conscience and the soul should be free of government interference and coercion.' The Ten Commandment won't necessarily be taught in schools, but 'the captive audience of students likely would have questions, which teachers would feel compelled to answer,' according to the judge. 'Teenage boys, being the curious hormonally driven creatures they are, might ask: 'Mrs. Walker, I know about lying and I love my parents, but how do I do adultery?'' the judge wrote. 'Truly an awkward moment for overworked and underpaid educators, who already have to deal with sex education issues … and a classic example of the law of unintended consequences in legislative edicts.' Biety's ruling — which traces the history of religious observation and persecution— asks whether that 'violent history gives rise to the question: 'Haven't we evolved?''' 'Other than size and longevity, the answer clearly is: 'Of course not,'' he wrote, adding 'The Beat Goes On' — with a footnote referencing the song from Sonny & Cher. He notes that 'those who immigrated to Texas were neither the first nor the last group to come to America in search of freedom from government-controlled religion,' pointing to a long line of state-imposed persecution. 'So it goes,' he wrote — with another footnote referencing Vonnegut's Slaughterhouse-Five. Rabbi Mara Nathan, the lead plaintiff in the case, said in a statement that 'children's religious beliefs should be instilled by parents and faith communities, not politicians and public schools.' Heather L. Weaver, senior counsel for the ACLU's Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief, said the ruling 'ensures that our clients' schools will remain spaces where all students, regardless of their faith, feel welcomed and can learn without worrying that they do not live up to the state's preferred religious beliefs.' In his conclusion, the judge offered an olive branch to his critics. 'For those who disagree with the Court's decision and who would do so with threats, vulgarities and violence, Grace and Peace unto you,' he wrote. 'May humankind of all faiths, beliefs and non-beliefs be reconciled one to another. Amen.' In a statement to The Independent, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said 'the Ten Commandments are a cornerstone of our moral and legal heritage, and their presence in classrooms serves as a reminder of the values that guide responsible citizenship.' 'Texas will always defend our right to uphold the foundational principles that have built this nation, and I will absolutely be appealing this flawed decision,' he added. Lawmakers in Arkansas have advanced similar legislation, and Oklahoma's chief school officials mandated copies of the Bible and Ten Commandments in all classrooms with 'immediate and strict compliance.' Last year, District Judge John Wheadon deGravelles paused a similar Louisiana law that had swiftly drawn legal challenges from civil rights groups anticipating a Supreme Court battle. Legislation to incorporate Christian teachings in public schools joins a nationwide effort from conservative special interest groups to move public funds into religious education, dovetailing with efforts by Donald Trump's administration and across the country to let families use taxpayer funds to send their children to private schools. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court reached a surprise tie in a case that could decide whether Oklahoma could open the first-ever taxpayer funded Catholic public charter school, which triggered a high-profile legal battle to decide whether public funds can be used to create religious schools — setting up a major test to the First Amendment's establishment clause. The 4-4 decision, from which Justice Amy Coney Barrett recused herself, upheld a lower-court ruling that effectively blocked the school's opening — for now. Solve the daily Crossword
