Newsom's death-row commutations spark DA revolt as prosecutors warn of legal fight

At least a dozen California district attorneys are publicly condemning Gov. Gavin Newsom's plan to commute all 548 death sentences in the state, arguing the sweeping move overrides juries, disregards victims' families and defies the will of state voters.

Newsom announced the plan on Thursday, saying state-sanctioned killing is incompatible with California's values. The move would convert the sentences to life without parole, though 382 cases still require approval from at least four California Supreme Court justices, according to the Associated Press.

In response, prosecuting attorneys across California have raised concerns about victims' rights, the governor's constitutional authority and the role of the California Supreme Court in reviewing hundreds of the commutations.

"Justice requires case-by-case consideration, not one-size-fits-all decisions," Sacramento County District Attorney Thien Ho said in response to Newsom's action.

Orange County District Attorney Todd Spitzer described the move as "mercy for the wolves" that inflicts "the ultimate act of cruelty on the sheep." He noted that regulations implemented by California's Board of Parole Hearings on Oct. 1 allow thousands of prisoners serving life without parole to become eligible for parole, arguing that Newsom's latest death row commutations could put these inmates "one step closer" to release. Newsom's office says, however, that the affected prisoners will remain in prison and are not eligible for release.

San Bernardino County District Attorney Jason Anderson said, "The Governor is attempting to appear courageous with this decision. He is not courageous. His commutations are solely based upon power and political aspirations." He accused Newsom of caring more about politics than people.

Anderson said, "Courage would require speaking with crime victims and the surviving family members of the people murdered by these death row inmates." He cited the case of Kevin Cooper, a California death-row inmate convicted of killing Josh Ryen's parents and sister, along with Ryen's friend, Chris Hughes, and leaving Ryen for dead.

According to Anderson, Newsom had not contacted Ryen or Hughes' mother, Mary Ann Hughes, to ask their views on a possible commutation, and Ryen has never received a call from the governor. He added, "Courage would require the Governor to follow Marsy's Law, California's constitutional rights belonging to victims of crime. He has not. I am not aware of any victims' family members receiving notice of these commutations from the Governor."

"A single order commuting all of them would set aside hundreds of individualized judgments without examining the facts of even one," San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow said.

San Joaquin District Attorney Ron Freitas said, "It invalidates the exhausting, emotionally wrenching work of our citizens who sat on juries, weighed horrific evidence, and delivered lawful verdicts. Most unforgivably, it is a slap in the face to victims and their families. This decision does not bind wounds; it tears them wide open, all over again."

The prosecutors pointed out that California voters rejected death-penalty repeal initiatives in 2012 and 2016 while approving Proposition 66 in 2016, which changed procedures for challenging death sentences and was promoted by supporters as a way to speed up the process. The district attorneys argued Newsom's blanket action overrides those ballot-box decisions without repealing the law.

"A blanket commutation is a mass erasure of justice. It overrides the will of California voters who have repeatedly defended capital punishment at the ballot box," Freitas added.

Meanwhile, some California prosecutors who spoke out against Newsom's controversial move signaled that the dispute may not end with public statements. San Diego County District Attorney Summer Stephan said her office was "researching any lawful remedies." Former DOJ prosecutor Jim Trusty also reacted to Newsom's plan, the criticism from victims' families and questions about the decision's timing.