The American criminal justice system has many safeguards in place to ensure that defendants are treated fairly, that convictions are just, and that punishments are not cruel. But while those safeguards exist on paper, there’s ample evidence to show that they fail, or are simply ignored, far too often, from the thousands of known wrongful convictions to the fact that punishments can indeed be cruel despite what the Constitution promises. That’s why states and the federal government grant the executive branch a crucial democratic backstop to either correct miscarriages of justice or give people more compassion and second chances: the power to pardon.
On Thursday, Governor Maura Healey showed that she takes that power seriously and plans to use it more aggressively than her predecessors when she announced her recommendation to pardon seven individuals for crimes they committed long ago and for which they’ve accepted responsibility. It’s a stark and promising contrast to how recent governors approached their pardoning power — that is, waiting until the end of their last term to start issuing these recommendations, if they proposed any at all. Charlie Baker, for example, issued 15 pardons and three commutations in his last year as governor; Deval Patrick recommended four in his final weeks in office; and Mitt Romney refused to grant a single pardon.
Advertisement
Of course, governors are free to recommend pardons anytime they like, but Healey’s predecessors’ reluctance to do it early gave off a whiff of cowardice — an unwillingness to deal with any potential political backlash to forgiving a convicted criminal. Healey’s swift action, however, shows the opposite: It means she’s ready to stand by these pardons, which still have to be approved by the Governor’s Council, and that she feels confident that the people she’s pardoning are indeed deserving of a second chance. By fearing the potential political liability of a pardon, past governors implied that the state, or its residents, were not actually ready to forgive the person receiving it.
“In recent decades, governors have not issued clemency recommendations in their first term let alone in their first six months,” Healey said at a press conference Thursday. “But I believe ... that justice delayed can be justice denied.” That’s the right approach for the governor, who now stands in a position to make far better use of her pardoning power than the people who came before her and create a more compassionate and forgiving justice system that recognizes the opportunities rehabilitation provides and people’s ability to change.
Advertisement
That’s why it’s critical for Healey to not only increase the number of cases the governor’s office will consider but to update the state’s clemency guidelines as well. In her announcement of the pardon recommendations, the governor committed to revising the guidelines in the coming months in order to promote fairness and timeliness, mitigate racial inequities, and account for the science of brain development and how it impacts adolescents’ judgment. “Young people change and grow,” Healey said.
But more than that, the governor should fundamentally change how she, her successors, and the Governor’s Council view pardons. Right now, pardons in Massachusetts are largely used to forgive people for past transgressions because they’ve accepted responsibility for the harm they caused and have shown that they have changed for the better. Indeed, under the current guidelines, governors should “rarely grant clemency to a petitioner who has not clearly demonstrated acceptance of responsibility for the” crime they were convicted for. But pardons can and should also be used to correct wrongful convictions that fell through the cracks of the appeals process.
Advertisement
That’s why, earlier this year, the Massachusetts Bar Association’s Clemency Task Force proposed changing the guidelines so that accepting responsibility would not be a factor in considering which petitioners to grant pardons to. Healey said her team met with the task force and is considering its recommendations. She should make sure that claims of innocence will not be dismissed and that convictions will not stand forever if somebody was denied a fair trial.
In her press conference, Healey said that pardons offer “an opportunity to soften the harshest edges of [the justice] system.” That’s certainly true. But pardons can also serve as the last line of defense to ensure that the safeguards of the criminal justice system are respected. Changing the guidelines to consider more claims of innocence and wrongful convictions, in addition to forgiving people for crimes they have accepted responsibility for, would only strengthen the pardon as the system’s last guardrail.
Healey has taken a strong and commendable stance. Her task, for the remainder of her time in office, is to follow through.
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us on Twitter at @GlobeOpinion.
