U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear Arkansas death penalty case | Arkansas Blog

Tuesday, February 21, 2017

U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear Arkansas death penalty case

Posted By on Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 10:42 AM

CLEARED FOR USE: State execution chamber.
  • CLEARED FOR USE: State execution chamber.
The United States Supreme Court has declined to review the Arkansas Supreme Court decision clearing the lethal injection procedure for condemned prisoners in Arkansas.

Attorney General Leslie Rutledge said promptly that the decision means executions can move forward once the Arkansas Supreme Court issues a mandate in the case and the governor sets execution dates.

Resumption remains somewhat problematic because of the expiration of one of three drugs used in the process. At last report, a new batch had not been obtained.

In a 4-3 split, the Arkansas court had rejected claims that condemned inmates should be allowed to know the suppliers of execution drugs and that there was a potential for cruel and unusual punishment from drugs from an unknown supplier. Use of the three-drug cocktail has encountered botched efforts in some states.

Gov. Asa Hutchinson has moved quickly to set execution dates when able. Nine inmates joined the appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.

It's been 11 years since an execution in Arkansas. There are 34 inmates on Death Row. Execution dates had been set for eight before court challenges and drug questions caused those dates to pass without executions.

A question on the Correction Department drug supply brought this response:

Our supply remains unchanged. We will move forward with preparations when appropriate.
The dates on the drug supplies:

* The potassium chloride expired in January 2017
* The midazolam expires in April 2017
* The vercuronium bromide expires March 2018

Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Stephen Breyer dissented from the decision not to hear the case, in keeping with objections in other death penalty cases.  They referred to a case from Alabama, in which they outlined their objections in an 18-page dissent.

Sotomayor wrote in that case:

Nearly two years ago in Glossip v. Gross, the Court issued a macabre challenge. In order to
successfully attack a State’s method of execution as cruel and unusual under the Eighth Amendment, a condemned prisoner must not only prove that the State’s chosen method risks severe pain, but must also propose a “knownand available” alternative method for his own execution.

Petitioner Thomas Arthur, a prisoner on Alabama’s death row, has met this challenge. He has amassed significant evidence that Alabama’s current lethal-injection protocol will result in intolerable and needless agony, and he has proposed an alternative—death by firing squad.

The Court of Appeals, without considering any of the evidence regarding the risk posed by the current protocol, denied Arthur’s claim because Alabama law does not expressly permit execution by firing squad, and so it cannot be a “known and available” alternative under Glossip.

Because this decision permits States to immunize their methods of execution—no matter how cruel or how unusual—from judicial review and thus permits state law to subvert the Federal Constitution, I would grant certiorari


Comments (3)

Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-3 of 3

Add a comment

More by Max Brantley

Readers also liked…

  • Your daily dose of Jason Rapert

    Sen. Jason Rapert really, really didn't like it when a KATV reporter asked him about the hypocrisy of his political arguments.
    • Feb 4, 2017
  • Free Zinn book for Arkansas teachers

    Arkansas teachers! Get your free Howard Zinn book here! Whether Kim Hendren likes it or not.
    • Mar 3, 2017
  • Hospitality, restaurant groups oppose bathroom bill

    Add the restaurant and hospitality association to those opposed to Sen. Linda Collins-Smith's bill to keep transgender people out of public restrooms that match their gender identity.
    • Mar 16, 2017


Most Viewed

  • Pine Bluff native wages war on fraternity culture

    Bloomberg has an interesting feature on Deborah Dunklin Tipton of Memphis, a native of Pine Bluff and heiress to an Arkansas agricultural fortune, who's put her money to work investigating the death of her son Robert in 2012 of what's been ruled an accidental drug overdose following fraternity hazing at High Point University in North Carolina.
  • Breaking: Ken Starr doesn't like the Clintons. Look who's talking about morality

    Surprise. Former Whitewater persecutor Kenneth Starr's new book trashes Bill and Hillary Clinton, as the Democrat-Gazette made clear this morning. You'd think Starr was some moral exemplar as he whines about his "persona non grata" status in Arkansas.
  • State probing illness outbreak among Fayetteville beer garden customers

    The Health Department Monday said it was investigating a cluster of illnesses among recent customers of JJ's Beer Garden and Brewery in Fayetteville. It's seeking anyone who experienced diarrhea or vomiting after a visit there between Sept. 13 and Monday.
  • More national attention to Arkansas's flawed Medicaid work rule

    The New York Times is the latest to focus unflattering attention on Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson's Medicaid work rule, which has already eliminated 4,300 from medical coverage. Many thousands more are likely to come.  One big problem: People don't know the rule exists.

Most Recent Comments


© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation