Supreme Court: Lethal Injection Is ‘Humane’
This article is from the archive of The New York Sun before the launch of its new website in 2022. The Sun has neither altered nor updated such articles but will seek to correct any errors, mis-categorizations or other problems introduced during transfer.
WASHINGTON — A national drive to halt the death penalty met defeat at the Supreme Court yesterday when the justices ruled that lethal injections, if properly administered, are a “humane” means of executing a condemned prisoner.
By a surprisingly large 7–2 margin, the court rejected a constitutional attack on the main method of carrying out the death penalty across America.
Its ruling cleared the way for executions to resume after a seven-month delay.
Since October, officials and judges in several states have put executions on hold while awaiting the outcome of the Kentucky case decided yesterday.
The court’s opinion by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. confirmed there is strong support for the death penalty among the justices and an unwillingness to tolerate endless delay.
“We begin with the principle … that capital punishment is constitutional. It necessarily follows that there must be a means of carrying it out,” Justice Roberts wrote. “Some risk of pain is inherent in any method of execution — no matter how humane — if only from the prospect of error in following the required procedure.” Justice Roberts said the court would not allow a theoretical risk that a future execution would be botched to stand in the way of carrying out the death penalty.
He also set a high bar for future challenges to carrying out the death penalty.
To win a halt to an execution, defense lawyers must show there is a “substantial risk” that the condemned prisoner will suffer “severe pain,” the chief justice said. And they have yet to show such evidence, he said.
“A state with a lethal injection protocol substantially similar to the protocol we upheld today would not create a risk that meets this standard,” he said.
Agreeing with Justice Roberts, Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. added a note to say the court should not allow “litigation gridlock” to “produce a de facto ban on capital punishment.” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy also agreed with Justice Roberts.
Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia said they would go further and reject all challenges to an execution method unless it is “deliberately designed to inflict pain.”
Despite the lopsided outcome, a deep split remains on capital punishment. Death penalty cases that come before the Supreme Court often are decided by a 5–4 vote.
