Newsom Seeks to Commute California Death Sentences

California Gov. Gavin Newsom says he plans to commute the death sentences of all 548 people facing execution under state law, replacing those punishments with life in prison without the possibility of parole.

The governor’s November 5 announcement begins a process that could reshape capital punishment in California, where executions have been paused under a moratorium Newsom imposed in 2019. The state has not carried out an execution since 2006.

Not every sentence can be changed by the governor acting alone. His office told The Associated Press that 382 cases require a recommendation from the California Supreme Court because the people involved have more than one felony conviction. The court’s role makes the announcement a plan and process, rather than proof that all 548 sentences have already changed.

What did Newsom announce?

Newsom released a letter to Californians explaining his decision and said he plans to change all current state death sentences to life without parole. The executive action concerns the punishment imposed in individual cases. It does not mean those prisoners are being released or made eligible for ordinary parole under the proposed replacement sentence.

His office’s count includes 529 men and 19 women, AP reported. Those figures describe the people identified when the governor announced the plan; they do not by themselves establish that every required court recommendation or final commutation has been issued.

The announcement comes near the end of Newsom’s time as governor. Democrat Xavier Becerra won the election to succeed him and is set to take office in January, according to AP’s California governor election report. The transition makes the timing of the court and executive processes an important part of what happens next.

How does a commutation differ from a pardon?

A commutation changes a sentence. A pardon is a different form of executive clemency and can affect certain consequences of a conviction. Newsom’s proposal is to replace a sentence of death with life imprisonment without parole, not to declare the people affected innocent.

The distinction matters for victims’ families, prisoners and the courts. A person whose death sentence is commuted under this plan would still face a life sentence. A sentence can change without the underlying criminal judgment being erased.

The California Supreme Court’s explanation of clemency describes the governor’s constitutional authority to grant reprieves, pardons and commutations after sentencing, subject to the procedures and limits in state law. That authority is an executive power, but the Constitution assigns the court a specific role in certain cases.

Why must the state Supreme Court review so many cases?

California’s Constitution says a governor may not grant a pardon or commutation to a person twice convicted of a felony without a recommendation from the state Supreme Court, with four justices concurring. Newsom’s office estimated that 382 of the 548 proposed commutations fall into that category, according to AP.

The court has explained that its function in these clemency requests is not to substitute its own view of whether mercy should be granted. Instead, it reviews whether there is sufficient support for the proposed exercise of clemency so that it would not represent an abuse of executive power.

A favorable recommendation permits the governor to grant clemency; the announcement itself should not be confused with 382 favorable recommendations. Each affected case has a legal record, and the handling of those requests will determine how much of the plan can take effect through the required process.

The state’s Habeas Corpus Resource Center, which represents people in capital cases, says the governor indicated that cases involving a separate felony conviction would be sent to the court for its recommendation. The center also describes earlier calls for the governor to commute the sentences.

What happens to California’s death penalty law?

The proposal concerns the people presently facing death sentences. It does not repeal the state’s capital punishment law. A future sentencing case and a governor’s clemency decision are separate legal questions, and California voters and lawmakers have debated the death penalty for decades.

Newsom’s 2019 moratorium stopped executions while he remains responsible for the executive policy. It did not itself remove death sentences from the records of the people who received them. His new proposal would address the sentences individually, subject to applicable legal requirements.

The state has not executed anyone since 2006, AP reported. That long gap and the moratorium mean the practical debate in California has involved not only executions but also the administration of cases, lengthy appeals and the punishment imposed on people who remain incarcerated.

Newsom’s 2019 executive order granted a reprieve to people sentenced to death, withdrew the state lethal-injection protocol and directed that the execution chamber at San Quentin be closed. A reprieve and a commutation are different actions: the former suspends an execution, while the latter changes the sentence.

The state corrections department traces the current law through several periods of legal change. It says voters approved Proposition 7 in 1978, reaffirming capital punishment, before the 2016 measures put competing approaches to the electorate. Those earlier votes help explain why an executive announcement can affect existing sentences while the statutory system itself remains in place.

California voters considered the issue in 2016. Proposition 62 would have replaced the death penalty with life without parole; voters rejected it. Proposition 66, intended to change procedures in capital cases, passed. The California corrections department’s historical account provide the official vote record.

Why is the decision disputed?

Supporters of ending capital punishment have raised concerns about the possibility of wrongful convictions, unequal application and the length and cost of capital litigation. AP reported that the American Civil Liberties Union welcomed Newsom’s announcement and has argued that racial bias affects the death penalty’s implementation.

Opponents of broad commutations argue that death sentences followed convictions and sentencing proceedings for serious crimes, and they say the state should respect those judgments and the views of victims’ relatives. Families do not all share the same opinion: the effect of a sentence change can be understood differently by people who have lost loved ones.

These arguments concern different questions. Whether a punishment should remain available under law is a policy issue. Whether a particular sentence will be changed under Newsom’s plan depends on the executive action and, where required, the court’s recommendation.

What should Californians watch next?

The central question is how the governor’s office submits and completes the proposed commutations, particularly the cases that require Supreme Court recommendations. Public court records and announcements can show which requests are received and acted upon, but the timing and outcome of individual requests should not be assumed in advance.

Another question is how the governor-elect approaches the execution moratorium. AP reported that Becerra has said he would extend it. That position is distinct from the legal status of each individual death sentence and from the court’s review of clemency requests.

For victims’ families and people serving the sentences, official notices in individual cases will matter more than an aggregate headline. The 548 figure captures the scope of Newsom’s stated plan; court recommendations and completed executive actions will show how it is implemented.

Join NewsCubby for free to follow the news that matters to you.

Image credits

• Governor of California Gavin Newsom, 2026 Portrait — Charles Ommanney / Office of the Governor of California · CC BY-SA 4.0; Commons also indicates California public record public domain in United States. Cropped and resized with text and branding for the covers. Reframed and animated in the video.Image adaptation under the same license.

• The Earl Warren Building and Courthouse — Marincyclist · CC BY-SA 4.0. Cropped, resized and animated in the video.Image adaptation under the same license.

• San Quentin — Jjz3d83 · public-domain dedication by creator. Cropped, resized and animated in the video.

Sources: https://www.gov.ca.gov/2026/11/05/governor-newsom-releases-letter-to-california-on-the-death-penalty/ · https://apnews.com/article/dd8a949162b3325edfaa381952ff2466 · https://supreme.courts.ca.gov/sites/default/files/supremecourt/default/2021-10/administrative-order_2021-05-26.pdf · https://www.hcrc.ca.gov/commutation.html · https://apnews.com/article/aae9829ede7e3f0c5e4512d5732d4df3 · https://www.cdcr.ca.gov/capital-punishment/history/

Prepared with AI assistance.