There are numerous legalities that come with making a law and it is an extremely thorough process. However, I believe that it is only in the case of developed countries, such as the US, that the law is more democratic than public pressure groups. There are countries in which the head of state is the primary, and sometimes only, creator of laws and the process is extremely undemocratic. Although this research question focuses specifically on the treatment of the right to life in the US, it is impossible to ignore the global perspective on this issue. Thus emerges the question of whether it is more effective to defend the right to life through the law or through public pressure groups in a specific country. Even within the US, there is great discrepancy as states like Texas executed 13 men in 2018 whilst Michigan abolished capital punishment in 1846. Thus, there is a higher level of democracy within legislation than in obdurate public pressure groups, showing that the former are debatably more effective in defending the right to life but definitely more powerful.

Another idea I came across in the interview was that defending human rights can actually be through both the law and public pressure groups. Amicus argues that it was the law, that put people on death row, and thus we must use it to show that they should not be executed. Individuals on death row are where they are due to the fact that people working within the law argued that the crimes they have committed are such that the only way of punishment is the elimination of their right to life. Therefore, Amicus uses the appeals process in the US and the bans on executions put in place by the Supreme Court over the years, to prove that there is no crime severe enough to justify the abuse of the right to life. If someone who had legitimate grounds not to be executed, such as being too young or having an intellectual disability according to current law, has their sentence altered and is spared death, it is regarded as stronger and more effective than a public campaign. A successful case shows people that this is a cause worth fighting for, and that there are many more people that need this help. Therefore, from this we can see the benefits of using both the law and public pressure groups. The law is generally more highly regarded than the work of pressure groups due to its undisputed legitimacy; but pressure groups are certainly not redundant. It may not be possible to convince Governors to completely abolish capital punishment, however by combining the two strengths of the law and public pressure groups, we can defend the right to life quicker, on a greater scale and more effectively.