SCOTUS may halt Florida's executions? Don't count on it
Meant to bring this up yesterday, but didn't have time ...
The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday decided to hear a case regarding the constitutionality of lethal injection, like that used in Florida, as a means of capital punishment.
The high court said it will consider a challenge from two inmates on Kentucky's death row, Ralph Baze and Thomas Clyde Bowling Jr., who claim that the state's lethal-injection procedure violates their constitutional rights.Can you say "5-4 vote," children? Sure. I knew you could.
This is the first time the high court has agreed to consider whether the mix of drugs used in Kentucky, Florida and 35 other states violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Death penalty opponents argue that the administration of the fatal chemicals often causes pain because the anesthesia fails to render the condemned person unconscious.
Here's the thing: it only takes four Justices to agree to hear a case (called "granting a writ of certiorari," or "granting cert" for short). But of course it takes five to decide a case. Therefore, even if the generally reality-based Justices (Stevens, Souter, Breyer, and Ginsburg) voted to grant cert, you can figure that the other five -- assuming Kennedy swings right as he's been doing lately -- will listen (more or less attentively) and then vote to let the states continue lethal injections.
Twenty-first Century American justice fever -- catch it!
Labels: death penalty, Florida, Kentucky, Supreme Court



















