A horrific, random act of violence on a Charlotte commuter train – the murder of a 23-year-old Ukrainian refugee named Iryna Zarutska – has sent shockwaves through North Carolina and ignited a furious legislative response.
Lawmakers in the state have now passed “Iryna’s Law,” a sweeping criminal justice bill that promises to get tough on crime in her name.
But the law does more than just reform the state’s bail system. In a controversial late-night addition, it also seeks to restart the state’s death penalty by potentially bringing back the firing squad.
The bill has become a flashpoint for a profound constitutional debate about justice, punishment, and the price of safety.
North Carolina’s “Iryna’s Law”
- What’s Happening: The North Carolina legislature has passed a sweeping criminal justice bill named “Iryna’s Law” in response to the recent murder of a Ukrainian refugee on a commuter train.
- What It Does (Part 1 – Bail): The law eliminates cashless bail for many crimes and sharply restricts the discretion of judges and magistrates in making pre-trial release decisions for violent offenders.
- What It Does (Part 2 – Death Penalty): It seeks to restart executions in the state (on hold since 2006) by allowing for alternative methods like the firing squad or electrocution if lethal injection drugs are unavailable.
- The Constitutional Issue: The bill ignites a major debate over the Eighth Amendment, challenging both the prohibition on “excessive bail” and the ban on “cruel and unusual punishments.”
A ‘Preventable’ Tragedy and a Legislative Reaction
The catalyst for the new law was the brutal and public murder of Iryna Zarutska. The suspect, Decarlos Brown Jr., had been arrested more than a dozen times and had recently been released by a magistrate on a misdemeanor charge without any bond.
Public outrage over the killing intensified after security footage of the attack was released, leading to a powerful push from Republican lawmakers to reform the state’s bail system.
“The catch-and-release practices for violent offenders will end today with your support. This heinous act was preventable.” – NC State Rep. Tricia Cotham
The new law is designed to prevent a situation like Brown’s from happening again by forcing judges to set a secured bond for a longer list of crimes.
The End of Cashless Bail: An Eighth Amendment Test
The first major part of “Iryna’s Law” is a direct challenge to the recent trend of bail reform. But critics argue it goes too far and may violate a key constitutional protection.
The Eighth Amendment prohibits “excessive bail.” While this doesn’t guarantee a right to be released, it has long been interpreted to mean that bail cannot be used as a tool of pre-trial punishment, especially for low-level offenses.
Opponents of the new law, like Charlotte defense attorney Tim Emry, argue that eliminating judicial discretion and forcing a secured bond for more crimes creates a two-tiered system of justice based on wealth, where the poor are jailed before trial while the rich go free. This, they contend, is a violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process right to be presumed innocent.
A Push to Restart the Death Penalty
In a move that stunned many, Republican Senate leader Phil Berger added a late amendment to the bill that has nothing to do with bail. The provision is designed to end the nearly 20-year moratorium on executions in North Carolina.
Executions have been on hold in the state since 2006 due to a series of legal challenges over the constitutionality of lethal injection drugs and the state’s now-repealed Racial Justice Act.
Berger’s amendment directs the state to find another method of execution – such as the firing squad or electrocution, which are used in other states – if lethal injection is declared unconstitutional or the drugs are unavailable.
“For nearly two decades, judicial and administrative roadblocks have stopped true justice for victims, and it’s time for that to end.” – NC Senate Leader Phil Berger
‘Cruel and Unusual’?
This move to reintroduce older methods of execution is certain to be challenged in court as a violation of the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual punishments.”
Democrats in the legislature blasted the amendment as a “barbaric” and cynical attempt to use a tragic murder as a political vehicle for restarting capital punishment. They argue that these methods have a high risk of being gruesome and torturous, which is the very definition of cruel and unusual.
The state is now poised for a new and intense legal battle over the future of the death penalty itself.
Smart on Crime or Tough on the Constitution?
The supporters of “Iryna’s Law” see it as a necessary, tough-on-crime response to a horrifying and preventable tragedy.
Opponents, however, argue that being “smart on crime” requires investing in preventative mental health services – the suspect in Zarutska’s murder has been diagnosed with schizophrenia – not just focusing on “punishment after the fact.”
This bill, born from a moment of intense public grief and outrage, has now become a major test of North Carolina’s approach to criminal justice and its interpretation of the constitutional limits on both bail and punishment.