{"id":14732,"date":"2026-10-22T13:18:35","date_gmt":"2026-10-22T21:18:35","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/inedc.com\/26\/?p=14732"},"modified":"2026-10-22T13:18:35","modified_gmt":"2026-10-22T21:18:35","slug":"california-death-penalty-da-pierson-urge-caution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/inedc.com\/26\/crime\/california-death-penalty-da-pierson-urge-caution\/","title":{"rendered":"California Death Penalty: DA Pierson Urge Caution"},"content":{"rendered":"

El Dorado County DA Joins Call to Reject Blanket Death Row Commutations<\/h1>\n

By Staff | Placerville News Online | Oct. 22, 2026<\/p>\n

El Dorado County District Attorney Vern Pierson is urging California Gov. Gavin Newsom to reject blanket commutations of the state’s death sentences, joining Anne Marie Schubert, president and CEO of the Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, in an opinion piece published Wednesday in the Los Angeles Times.<\/p>\n

The Oct. 21 commentary argues that decisions affecting people sentenced to death should be considered individually, with attention to the judicial process and the families whose lives have been permanently changed by murder.<\/p>\n

The Peace Officers Research Association of California (PORAC) has backed the call for a case-by-case approach, emphasizing that victims’ families should have a meaningful voice in decisions affecting criminal sentences.<\/p>\n

For El Dorado County residents, the debate puts a local elected prosecutor at the center of a statewide discussion about executive clemency, criminal accountability and the rights of crime victims.<\/p>\n

Pierson and Schubert argue against a blanket policy<\/h3>\n

In their Los Angeles Times opinion piece, titled \u201cA death sentence is too heavy a decision to be overturned lightly,\u201d<\/a> Pierson and Schubert contend that a decision affecting hundreds of death sentences should not be made through a single, across-the-board action.<\/p>\n

\u201cNewsom should abandon blanket commutation and give each case, and each family, the individual consideration they deserve,\u201d the authors wrote.<\/p>\n

Their argument centers on the consequences of murder for surviving family members and the significance of sentences imposed through the courts. They also acknowledge that victims’ families do not share a single position on capital punishment: Some support clemency, while others oppose it.<\/p>\n

The authors argue that those differing views deserve individual consideration rather than being overshadowed by a broad policy decision.<\/p>\n

Schubert previously served as Sacramento County district attorney. Pierson is the elected district attorney of El Dorado County. Both bring prosecutorial experience to a debate that extends beyond any single county.<\/p>\n

What commutation means in California<\/h3>\n

A commutation reduces a criminal sentence. It is distinct from a pardon, which can provide relief from certain consequences of a conviction.<\/p>\n

Under the California Constitution, the governor has authority to grant executive clemency, subject to applicable legal requirements. In cases involving more than one felony conviction, additional approval requirements may apply.<\/p>\n

The governor’s office says clemency decisions consider several factors, including public safety, the circumstances of the offense, the applicant’s conduct and rehabilitation, and the impact on victims and survivors.<\/p>\n

California’s existing process provides for individual applications and investigations. The question raised by Pierson and Schubert is whether the governor should use that authority to commute death sentences broadly rather than assess cases individually.<\/p>\n

Newsom’s administration has described clemency as a tool that can encourage rehabilitation, improve public safety and correct unjust outcomes. The governor’s position and any specific plan concerning blanket commutations should be distinguished from the arguments advanced by the two prosecutors.<\/p>\n

Residents can review the state’s published criteria through the governor’s official commutations information page<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Victims’ families at the center of the debate<\/h3>\n

A central point in the op-ed is that the effects of a clemency decision reach beyond the person serving a sentence.<\/p>\n

For families of murder victims, a sentence can carry profound personal significance. Pierson and Schubert argue that the government should take those families’ perspectives into account when considering a decision that could substantially change a sentence imposed by a court.<\/p>\n

Their position does not establish that every victim’s family opposes commutation. Instead, their argument calls for individual consideration of families’ views, recognizing that those views can differ.<\/p>\n

PORAC’s support for a case-by-case approach similarly highlights victims’ families and the justice process as important considerations.<\/p>\n

The dispute reflects a broader policy question: How should California balance the governor’s constitutional clemency authority with accountability for serious crimes, public safety and the interests of people harmed by those crimes?<\/p>\n

What El Dorado County residents should watch<\/h3>\n

The op-ed adds El Dorado County’s top prosecutor to the public debate over how California should handle its death sentences.<\/p>\n

Several questions remain relevant as the discussion develops:<\/p>\n