18 Comments
User's avatar
Randy's avatar

The six β€œpro-life” judges love, love, love executions. The mere thought of putting someone to death makes Alito tingle with excitement.

Expand full comment
Rene Folk's avatar

The State of Indiana, β€˜we won’t cut your vocal cords because that would be cruel and unusual. However, death by lethal injection, no problem.’

Expand full comment
Jos1463's avatar

Exactly. Utterly barbaric. Shame on ALL the judges and prosecutors who did not stop this murder

Expand full comment
Phil Johnson's avatar

I am a member of Death Penalty Action and am about to sign in on the vigil Zoom. I am taking this info with me. Wow. I thought TX was bad along with AL. This takes the cake.

Expand full comment
tecolote42's avatar

God help us all

Expand full comment
BigOinSeattle's avatar

Didn’t know about this case but it seems like a dubious application of the death penalty, at best. What is more, lethal injection is the most barbaric form of punishment. It lets the government kill without getting messy hands and is a perversion of the Hippocratic oath to have a doctor administer it. What is wrong with the firing squad and hanging? Quick and painless. If it has to be done.

Expand full comment
Devon Williams's avatar

It's also the least cool. Firing squad and the electric chair at least have pizzaz.

Expand full comment
Henry's avatar

yes the death penalty is wrong. But, there is no

but, i have hoped that essays that have to do with the law, should deal with the law, not with social issues. For years, the law has beenm the same as to questions like this. And, it is the the role of the Courts is to resolve disputes and interpret the meaning of the Constitutoin. And, as to capital punishment, these issues were long ago resolved.

There is NOTING in the Constitution that would make it thE role of the Court to stop capital punishment expcept the prohibition against "cruel and unusual" punishent. But capital punishment has never been unusual and for many it is less cruel than life (or decades) in prision. I've never been in prision or taked with a prisinor like one who went in at age 20 and got out at 60, But it would not surprise me if they felt that that was more cruel than a quick death.

The fact is that the Courts' role is NOT to rescue us from the cruelty of laws requested by the voters and passedlegislatures. That is the role of democracy--i.e. the voters.

And, it seems to me that a column such as this about the law should stress this point and NOT foster the notion that judges are motivated by their politican views. Mentioning the name of the President who nominated them, as was now usually done when the judge was nominated by Trump. Of couse, the author did mention hat in this case the Supreme Court decision was UNANAMOUS, but did ot mention that 4 of the justices ere nominated by Biden or Obama.

And, it also seems to me that a column like this would be more helpful if it educated non-lawyers about the role of the judicial system and explain the logic of the law, rather than the author's opion of the wisdom of the legislation.

Expand full comment
Joe From the Bronx's avatar

A divided appeals judgment provides a special reason for a liberal justice to use this as one of the times they at least give a statement instead of just providing no public dissent. Austin Sarat at Verdict/Justia provided a couple of columns on the execution, including a criticism of allowing "volunteers." I think his second essay probably too absolutist but both are worth reading.

Expand full comment
Phil Johnson's avatar

... which I did and found an OK death case that interpreted Atkins (the "Cruel/Unusual punishment" DP case named Fuston. Too late now but it was the same issue about mental state vs. execution. I gotta go search for it and follow up...

Expand full comment
KAO's avatar

So much for our very own pro-life justices. This is a travesty. Because, of course mercy and medical reasoning cannot be part of the equation.

Expand full comment
Phil Johnson's avatar

Of course not, for reasons stated above. But responsible officials should be more transparent about the methodology used to ensure "cruel and unusual punishment" does not become a factor in an execution's process. I would like to see what the "witness" referred to above has to say about the process in this case, and if he or she was a journalist with a duty to report accurately.

To me, executing a mentally over-the-edge convict is over-the-top cruelty ipso facto. What say you?

Expand full comment
Phil Johnson's avatar

The dirty deed is done. No witnesses. God, I am ashamed. And another tomorrow through Thursday in OK. We all have to beseech Our Lord for mercy in this head-screwed-on-wrong country.

Expand full comment
Chris Geidner's avatar

There was a witness because Corcoran allowed a media witness to use one of his spaces. See the update above.

Expand full comment
Jos1463's avatar

Sounded like that witness was only allowed in after some time had passed post lethal injection? Did I read that right?

Expand full comment
Danna M's avatar

πŸ˜”

Expand full comment
Karen Scofield's avatar

You are Brilliant, Chris, and will reStack ASAP πŸ™πŸ’―πŸ‘

Expand full comment