Federal Inmates Refuse Biden’s Offer to Commute Death Sentences

Two federal death row inmates refuse President Biden’s clemency, sparking legal debate over their strategic decision.

At a Glance

Shannon Agofsky and Len Davis reject Biden’s commutation of their death sentences to life without parole.
Inmates claim commutation hinders their chances of appealing cases due to reduced scrutiny.
Both maintain innocence and argue death sentences highlight misconduct in their cases.
Biden commuted sentences of 37 federal death row inmates, excluding three high-profile criminals.
Decision aligns with Biden’s campaign promise but faces criticism for not fully abolishing federal death penalty.

Inmates Reject Presidential Clemency

In an unexpected turn of events, two federal death row inmates, Shannon Agofsky and Len Davis, are attempting to reject President Joe Biden’s clemency that commuted their sentences to life without parole. This rare move has sparked a legal debate over the strategic implications of their decision and the extent of presidential power in granting pardons.

Two prisoners who are among the 37 federal inmates whose death sentences were commuted last month by President Biden — a move that spares them from the death chamber — are refusing to sign paperwork accepting his clemency action. https://t.co/qCT7zouA11

— NBC News (@NBCNews) January 6, 2025

The inmates’ refusal stems from their belief that the commutation could potentially hinder their chances of appealing their cases. They argue that their death sentences currently garner heightened scrutiny, which they view as crucial for their ongoing legal proceedings. This heightened scrutiny involves a closer examination of death penalty cases for errors due to their life-or-death nature.

Legal Strategy Behind the Refusal

Both Agofsky and Davis maintain their innocence and argue that their death sentences serve to highlight alleged misconduct in their cases. Agofsky was sentenced to death for a 2001 murder in prison and had a prior life sentence for a 1989 murder. Davis, a former police officer, was sentenced to death for arranging the murder of Kim Groves in 1994 after she filed a brutality complaint against him.

The inmates have filed emergency motions to block the change to their death sentences, arguing it would undermine their ongoing legal appeals. Both are requesting a judge to appoint co-counsel for their injunction requests, underscoring the complexity of their legal strategy.

Biden’s Broader Initiative on Capital Punishment

President Biden’s decision to commute the sentences of 37 federal death row inmates to life imprisonment is part of a broader initiative to reduce the frequency and application of federal capital punishment. This move aligns with his campaign promise to eliminate the federal death penalty, although he has faced criticism for not fully abolishing it.

The commutation excludes three inmates, including the Boston Marathon bomber and other high-profile criminals. This decision comes before President-elect Donald Trump, who plans to expand the death penalty, takes office. Biden’s administration had previously announced a moratorium on federal executions to review protocols.

Legal and Political Implications

The Supreme Court ruled in 1927 that a president can grant pardons without the convict’s consent, potentially complicating Agofsky and Davis’s attempts to reject the commutation. This legal precedent raises questions about the limits of presidential clemency power and the rights of inmates in such situations.

Biden’s clemency actions have sparked political debate, especially in light of Trump’s contrasting stance on capital punishment. The decision follows Biden’s recent commutation of sentences for nonviolent offenders and his controversial pardon of his son, Hunter Biden. These actions are influenced by Biden’s personal beliefs and experiences, as well as pressure from advocacy groups.

As the legal battle unfolds, the case of Agofsky and Davis highlights the complex interplay between presidential power, criminal justice reform, and the strategic considerations of death row inmates fighting to prove their innocence.