6.13.2006
Prisoners Gain in Suit Attacking Lethal Injection (NYTimes.com)
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
Published: June 13, 2006
WASHINGTON, June 12 — The Supreme Court opened the door Monday for death-row inmates to challenge the way most states carry out executions by lethal injection.
In its unanimous opinion, the court expressed no view on the constitutionality either of lethal injection in general or of the specific procedures and combination of chemicals that a Florida inmate, Clarence E. Hill, and numerous others around the country have recently challenged in federal court.
The justices addressed themselves solely to the procedural route that such lawsuits must take, and chose the route that is by far the more inmate-friendly from the two options that the case presented.
Nonetheless, it was the tight focus of the case, an appeal by Mr. Hill of a ruling by the federal appeals court in Atlanta, that probably enabled the justices to maintain their unanimity. It remains to be seen how they would rule on the underlying constitutional question of whether the disputed lethal injection method violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Just three weeks ago the court turned down, without comment, a case from Tennessee, Abdur'Rahman v. Bredesen, that presented that issue directly. The justices have also permitted several executions to be carried out by lethal injection, without intervening, while the Florida case was pending.
Federal courts around the country have begun wrestling with the issue, which opponents of the death penalty have brought to the fore in recent months on the basis of a report last year in a British medical journal, The Lancet.
(More ... Prisoners Gain in Suit Attacking Lethal Injection - New York Times) ¶ 18:10
Published: June 13, 2006
WASHINGTON, June 12 — The Supreme Court opened the door Monday for death-row inmates to challenge the way most states carry out executions by lethal injection.
In its unanimous opinion, the court expressed no view on the constitutionality either of lethal injection in general or of the specific procedures and combination of chemicals that a Florida inmate, Clarence E. Hill, and numerous others around the country have recently challenged in federal court.
The justices addressed themselves solely to the procedural route that such lawsuits must take, and chose the route that is by far the more inmate-friendly from the two options that the case presented.
Nonetheless, it was the tight focus of the case, an appeal by Mr. Hill of a ruling by the federal appeals court in Atlanta, that probably enabled the justices to maintain their unanimity. It remains to be seen how they would rule on the underlying constitutional question of whether the disputed lethal injection method violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment.
Just three weeks ago the court turned down, without comment, a case from Tennessee, Abdur'Rahman v. Bredesen, that presented that issue directly. The justices have also permitted several executions to be carried out by lethal injection, without intervening, while the Florida case was pending.
Federal courts around the country have begun wrestling with the issue, which opponents of the death penalty have brought to the fore in recent months on the basis of a report last year in a British medical journal, The Lancet.
(More ... Prisoners Gain in Suit Attacking Lethal Injection - New York Times) ¶ 18:10
