Cases and articles

The US supreme court has ruled that lethal injection does not violate the constitution. States are now competing to reschedule delayed executions

Yesterday, in a splintered and chaotic decision producing seven separate (and occasionally vitriolic) opinions from the nine justices, the US supreme court again opened the floodgate that has been holding back the death penalty, ruling that lethal injections as currently administered were not unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court's regrettable ruling upholding Kentucky's use of lethal injection is a reminder of why government should get out of the business of executing prisoners. Rather than producing a crisp decision upholding the constitutionality of lethal injection, the court broke down into warring opinions debating the ugly question of how much unnecessary pain the state may impose. Most compelling were the dissenters, which wanted to know more about whether Kentucky was torturing inmates needlessly, and Justice John Paul Stevens's challenge to capital punishment in all forms.

Today in his concurrence in Baze Justice Stevens announced in his concurrence:

In sum, just as Justice White ultimately based his conclusion in Furman on his extensive exposure to countless cases for which death is the authorized penalty,

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The US Supreme Court Wednesday ruled that lethal injection was constitutional in a landmark ruling set to pave the way for executions to resume after a lull of more than six months.

The judges ruled by seven for and two against that the risk of suffering to those executed by lethal injection did not constitute "cruel and unusual punishment" which is barred under the US Constitution.