Submit your claim details for a free, no obligation case review.
Get Started:
In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the lethal injection method used for executions in Kentucky does not violate the U.S. Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
The decision opens the way for states to resume executions, which have been on hold across the country since September when the justices agreed to hear arguments in the case of two Kentucky inmates on death row.
The Arguments
Attorneys for the inmates challenged the constitutionality of the lethal injection method that uses a three-drug cocktail to execute the condemned. Most states in the U.S. use this method for executions.
The cocktail consists of an anesthetic, a drug that paralyzes the muscles of the lungs and diaphragm, and one that stops the heart. Defense attorneys argued that when administered improperly, the inmate could suffer an excruciating death.
Lawyers for the state of Kentucky countered that executioners are not required to eliminate the risk of suffering as part of the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
The Decision
The majority of justices agreed, with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Justice David H. Souter offering the dissenting votes.
Soon after the ruling was issued, Virginia’s governor lifted the state’s moratorium on executions. Other prosecutors and governors around the U.S. announced their intentions to start seeking execution dates as well.
(Source: Baltimore Sun)
Facing capital crime charges? Contact an experienced criminal attorney today to learn more about your defense options.
Copyright © 2001 - 2012 Online Lawyer Source
ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT—Thank you for your visit. The content published on this website was not written by medical professionals and should not, at any point, be mistaken for medical advice. Furthermore, the information on this site is intended for educational purposes only and should never interfere with a patient/site visitor and his or her healthcare provider. In addition, viewing the content on this website, requesting additional information, or transmitting information through a contact form should never be considered the formation of an attorney-client relationship. The material published on this site is general and may not apply to your specific circumstances. Every case comes with its own set of unique circumstances; past success discussed on this site does not guarantee future performance. Information found on this website should not be used as incentive to act without seeking counsel from a professional. For more information, please read our disclaimer.