The United States Supreme Court, In A Plurality (7 To 2) Majority Opinion, Upholds Kentucky's (And Other States') Lethal Injection Drug Protocol.
The United States Supreme Court has issued a fractured 7 to 2 opinion in Baze Vs. Rees, 07-5439, (2008), upholding Kentucky's method of executing its prisoners by lethal injection.
The 7 justices who formed the majority, notwithstanding their differing reasons for doing so, agreed with Kentucky Supreme Court's decision, and found that "petitioners [Ralph Baze and other condemned prisoners] have not carried their burden of showing that the risk of pain from maladministration of a concededly humane lethal injection protocol, and the failure to adopt untried and untested alternatives, constitute cruel and unusual punishment."
According to the Justices, "to constitute cruel and unusual punishment, an execution
method must present a 'substantial' or 'objectively intolerable' risk of serious harm."
The fractured decision suggests that the Justices are not yet clear amongst themselves on what the standard has to be.
For instance, Justices Thomas and Scalia, who joined in the majority, found that "the plurality’s formulation of the governing standard finds no support in the original understanding of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause ... ."
Justice Breyer, another majority participant, sounds like he joined the majority because he concluded that "there cannot be found, either in the record or in the readily available literature, sufficient grounds to believe that Kentucky’s lethal injection method creates a significant risk of unnecessary suffering" -- in effect suggesting that this case is more of a failure of proof for him than anything else, and he believes that such a time may come when that proof may become available.
Justice Stevens predicts as much when he states that "instead of ending the controversy, this case will generate debate not only about the constitutionality of
the three-drug protocol, and specifically about the justification for the use of pancuronium bromide, but also about the justification for the death penalty itself."
Because the U. S. Supreme Court Justices were so SPLINTERED, it is CERTAIN the ONLY way for other states to ensure the constitutionality of their lethal injection laws, and to avoid a challenge of their own procedures and methods, is to strictly follow Kentucky's!
And so it goes. Kentucky and other states can now commence with executing inmates and Kentucky will have its next execution this year, predictably.
Update: West Virginia, joins Florida, to immediately resume executions after today's opinion was issued. Nebraska Governor is poised to head in that direction.
The 7 justices who formed the majority, notwithstanding their differing reasons for doing so, agreed with Kentucky Supreme Court's decision, and found that "petitioners [Ralph Baze and other condemned prisoners] have not carried their burden of showing that the risk of pain from maladministration of a concededly humane lethal injection protocol, and the failure to adopt untried and untested alternatives, constitute cruel and unusual punishment."
According to the Justices, "to constitute cruel and unusual punishment, an execution
method must present a 'substantial' or 'objectively intolerable' risk of serious harm."
The fractured decision suggests that the Justices are not yet clear amongst themselves on what the standard has to be.
For instance, Justices Thomas and Scalia, who joined in the majority, found that "the plurality’s formulation of the governing standard finds no support in the original understanding of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause ... ."
Justice Breyer, another majority participant, sounds like he joined the majority because he concluded that "there cannot be found, either in the record or in the readily available literature, sufficient grounds to believe that Kentucky’s lethal injection method creates a significant risk of unnecessary suffering" -- in effect suggesting that this case is more of a failure of proof for him than anything else, and he believes that such a time may come when that proof may become available.
Justice Stevens predicts as much when he states that "instead of ending the controversy, this case will generate debate not only about the constitutionality of
the three-drug protocol, and specifically about the justification for the use of pancuronium bromide, but also about the justification for the death penalty itself."
Because the U. S. Supreme Court Justices were so SPLINTERED, it is CERTAIN the ONLY way for other states to ensure the constitutionality of their lethal injection laws, and to avoid a challenge of their own procedures and methods, is to strictly follow Kentucky's!
And so it goes. Kentucky and other states can now commence with executing inmates and Kentucky will have its next execution this year, predictably.
Update: West Virginia, joins Florida, to immediately resume executions after today's opinion was issued. Nebraska Governor is poised to head in that direction.
Labels: Crime, Justice, U. S. Supreme Court
posted by KYJurisDoctor at 10:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home