Inform
Empower

Victim Awareness and Education

Victims Deserve Truth in Sentencing

At Citizens Against Homicide (CAH), we believe victims and their families deserve truth in sentencing, accountability, and elected officials who respect the justice system that delivered their verdicts. Governor Gavin Newsom’s decision to commute the death sentences of all 548 individuals on California’s death row to life without the possibility of parole raises serious concerns about the integrity and finality of the sentencing process. By taking this action, the Governor has effectively overridden the decisions of juries, courts, and California voters, who have repeatedly rejected efforts to abolish the death penalty.

These sentences were not handed down arbitrarily; they were the result of a judicial process intended to hold individuals accountable for the most heinous crimes. For families who have endured the unimaginable loss of a loved one, knowing that the perpetrator will serve the sentence imposed at trial may be the closest thing to closure they will ever receive. Changing that sentence after the fact disregards not only the outcome of the trial but also the lasting impact on those left behind. We believe justice must mean more than a verdict - it must mean honoring the sentences delivered, respecting the will of the people, and ensuring that victims and their families are not forgotten once the courtroom doors close. Victims deserve truth in sentencing.

Call to Action

How Can I Support?

Send an Email to the Supreme Court
Printable Copy of Letter to Download

We encourage our community, victims' families, and concerned Californians to make their voices heard.

WE URGE THE CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT TO:

  • UPHOLD THE INTEGRITY OF THE JUDICIAL PROCESS and carefully consider the implications of blanket commutations.

  • RECOGNIZE THE INDIVIDUAL CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH CASE, including the severity of the crimes and the sentences imposed by juries.

  • RESPECT THE VICTIMS AND THEIR FAMILIES whose lives have been permanently changed and whose voices deserve consideration in decisions affecting their pursuit of justice.

  • HONOR THE WILL OF CALIFORNIA VOTERS who have repeatedly voted to retain the death penalty.

  • PROTECT THE PRINCIPLE OF TRUTH IN SENTENCING so that the sentences imposed through the criminal justice system are not treated as meaningless or disposable.

Justice does not end when a verdict is delivered. For victims' families, the consequences of these crimes last a lifetime. The sentences handed down in court matter, and the families who have waited for justice deserve to have those sentences respected.

TAKE ACTION. MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD.

CAH has prepared a letter template that you can use to express your concerns directly to the California Supreme Court. We encourage you to personalize the letter, share your perspective, and join us in advocating for truth in sentencing.

VICTIMS DESERVE TRUTH IN SENTENCING.

Make Your Voice Heard

Your voice matters. Use our letter template to contact the California Supreme Court and express your concerns about the commutation of California's death row sentences. You can access both an emailable and printable version of the letter using the buttons above. For your convenience, the full letter is also provided below for you to read.

[Your Name]

[City, California]

[Date]

SUBJECT: Oppose Blanket Death Sentence Commutations — Demand Individualized Review

The Honorable Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero and Associate Justices

Supreme Court of California

350 McAllister Street

San Francisco, CA 94102

Dear Chief Justice Guerrero and Associate Justices:

I am writing to urge the California Supreme Court to reject any blanket approval of Governor Gavin Newsom’s proposed commutations of hundreds of death sentences.

These cases are not simply names on a list. Each represents a life taken, families forever devastated, and decisions reached by juries and judges after consideration of the evidence and circumstances of individual crimes. Many of these individuals have extensive criminal histories and multiple felony convictions. Their cases deserve more than a blanket decision.

The Court has an independent constitutional responsibility and must not become a rubber stamp for an executive policy initiative. I urge the Justices to demand individualized consideration of every case, including the nature of the crimes, criminal histories, and the voices of the victims and surviving families.

Victims’ families should not be reduced to an afterthought in decisions that fundamentally affect the justice they have spent years seeking. Their loved ones’ lives matter, their suffering matters, and their voices deserve to be heard.

California voters have repeatedly upheld the death penalty. That expressed will should not be casually disregarded, nor should the individual decisions of juries and judges be swept aside through a blanket policy.

There is a profound difference between individual acts of mercy and wholesale commutations driven by political policy. Justice is not one-size-fits-all. Neither is mercy.

I respectfully ask the Court to reject blanket approval and insist upon individualized review, accountability, and meaningful consideration of the victims and families affected by these decisions.

Respectfully,

[Your Name]

Myth Versus Fact

  • FACT: A sentence of life without the possibility of parole means an individual is not eligible for parole under that sentence. However, victims' families have reason to question whether the sentence imposed today will remain unchanged in the future. Changes in legislation, court rulings, and future executive decisions can affect the criminal justice landscape.

    A death sentence and a life-without-parole sentence are fundamentally different punishments. For families whose loved ones were murdered, the sentence imposed by a jury represents a decision reached after years of investigation, prosecution, and trial. Changing that sentence after the fact alters the outcome they were promised through the judicial process.

    At CAH, we believe victims deserve truth in sentencing. Families should not have to continually question whether the punishment imposed for the murder of their loved one will be changed or reconsidered.

  • FACT: Not all 548 proposed commutations are subject to California Supreme Court review. According to the Governor's November 5, 2026, filing, 382 individuals have multiple felony convictions and require a recommendation from at least four California Supreme Court justices before their sentences can be commuted.

    The remaining 166 individuals do not require this recommendation, meaning the Governor can proceed with their commutations without that additional constitutional step.

    While all 548 individuals are included in the proposed action, the distinction matters. The Supreme Court's role is limited to the 382 individuals requiring its recommendation.

  • FACT: Governor Newsom has asked the California Supreme Court to issue its recommendations by December 31, 2026, so he can complete the commutations before leaving office.

    This request concerns 382 individuals, representing hundreds of criminal histories, underlying convictions, and families affected by the original crimes. The Court must obtain the concurrence of at least four justices for each qualifying recommendation.

    The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation's November 5 notice to victims and survivors states that the timing of the necessary legal steps is unknown. This uncertainty is especially concerning for families who deserve meaningful consideration and an opportunity to make their voices heard.

    CAH believes decisions of this magnitude should not be driven by an administrative deadline or political transition. Victims' families deserve adequate time, meaningful consideration, and an opportunity to have their perspectives heard before decisions affecting their loved ones' cases are finalized.

  • FACT: Although the proposed commutations do not overturn convictions, erase criminal records, or eliminate restitution orders, they fundamentally change the punishment imposed by the jury.

    A death sentence is a distinct legal punishment. Replacing it with life imprisonment without the possibility of parole changes the outcome of the original sentencing process.

    For victims' families, the distinction is significant. The sentence was determined through a trial involving evidence, testimony, and deliberation. The families who endured that process deserve to have its outcome respected.

    A conviction without the sentence originally imposed is not the same outcome. Truth in sentencing means respecting the decisions reached through the judicial process and recognizing the lasting impact those decisions have on victims and their families.