Supreme Court: States do not have disclose lethal injection drugs

[TacticalEvilDan]

FLORENCE, Ariz. (AP) — The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for Arizona to carry out its third execution in the last year Wednesday following a closely watched First Amendment fight over the secrecy surrounding lethal injection drugs.

Joseph Rudolph Wood, 55, was scheduled to be put to death at the state prison in Florence amid new scrutiny nationwide over lethal injections after several controversial executions.

Wood's lawyers used a new legal tactic in which defense attorneys claim their clients' First Amendment rights are being violated by the government's refusal to reveal details about lethal injection drugs. Wood's lawyers were seeking information about the two-drug combination that will be used to kill him, including the makers of the drugs.

A federal appeals court ruled in Wood's favor before the U.S. Supreme Court put the execution back on track. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision marked the first time an appeals court has acted to delay an execution based on the issue of drug secrecy, said Richard Dieter, director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C.

The 9th Circuit gave new hope to death penalty opponents. While many death row inmates have made the same First Amendment argument as Wood, the Supreme Court has not been receptive to the tactic. The court has ruled against them each time the transparency issue has come before the justices.

States have refused to reveal details such as which pharmacies are supplying lethal injection drugs and who is administering them because of concerns over harassment.

Supreme Court denies inmate's last-ditch appeal - seattlepi.com

It occurs to me that, a this point, a state could now use a paralytic (such as is used during an intubation procedure), then pump the condemned full of rat poison ... or acid ... bleach ...

Three cheers for civilization, hip-hip hooray.

This post has been brought to you by 200-proof sarcasm.

 

[TheNextEra]

Here's a wonderful thought as well. Don't do anything that will get you the death penalty. Please forgive me if I don't really care about how a death row inmate is put to death.

 

[Thom Paine]

.................Don't do anything that will get you the death penalty. ..................... I don't really care about how a death row inmate is put to death.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said

Thom Paine

 

[Kal'Stang]

Here's a wonderful thought as well. Don't do anything that will get you the death penalty. Please forgive me if I don't really care about how a death row inmate is put to death.

[/B]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said

Thom Paine

Ditto.

 

[jamesrage]

Supreme Court denies inmate's last-ditch appeal - seattlepi.com

It occurs to me that, a this point, a state could now use a paralytic (such as is used during an intubation procedure), then pump the condemned full of rat poison ... or acid ... bleach ...

Three cheers for civilization, hip-hip hooray.

This post has been brought to you by 200-proof sarcasm.

The only reason these pieces of **** and their rat lawyers were suing is to delay their execution and perhaps have scumbag sympathizers intimidate drug makers into not selling their drugs to death penalty states. This is a good ruling.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

A federal appeals court ruled in Wood's favor before the U.S. Supreme Court put the execution back on track. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision marked the first time an appeals court has acted to delay an execution based on the issue of drug secrecy, said Richard Dieter, director of the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington, D.C.

9th circuit? Gee, there's a ****ing surprise.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Here's a wonderful thought as well. Don't do anything that will get you the death penalty. Please forgive me if I don't really care about how a death row inmate is put to death.

[/B]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said

Thom Paine

Ditto.

Noting for the record that none of you are, among other things, strict Constitutionalists. That goes for the folks like Bob who thanked you, too.

 

[TheNextEra]

Noting for the record that none of you are, among other things, strict Constitutionalists. That goes for the folks like Bob who thanked you, too.

I'm flawed in many ways, the death penalty being one of them. Sorry but I don't feel anything for these death row people that commit Horrific and Violent murders.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

The only reason these pieces of **** and their rat lawyers were suing is to delay their execution and perhaps have scumbag sympathizers intimidate drug makers into not selling their drugs to death penalty states. This is a good ruling.

If the state needs to keep a secret for any reason other than either state security or to protect the rights of an individual, then it is doing something wrong.

Conservatives talk about the wonders of the free market all the time, but I guess that's just for when it's convenient.

 

[TurtleDude]

I am ambivalent about the death penalty mainly because I don't like a government having that power. but the scum bags who truly deserve getting whack are getting off easy these days. up to a couple centuries ago. pain was part of the punishment. people who murdered others (or in some cases, much lesser offenses) had such wonderful experiences as being broken on the wheel, drawn and quartered (which included one's "package" being cut off with a red hot knife, and slow disembowelment) anal impalement, the rack, burning alive, boiling in oil, and the disgusting device known as the pear

the constitution prevents CRUEL punishment but does not guarantee a pain free one

 

[MaggieD]

Supreme Court denies inmate's last-ditch appeal - seattlepi.com

It occurs to me that, a this point, a state could now use a paralytic (such as is used during an intubation procedure), then pump the condemned full of rat poison ... or acid ... bleach ...

Three cheers for civilization, hip-hip hooray.

This post has been brought to you by 200-proof sarcasm.

Well, when I really think about it, I'm surprised FOIA doesn't cover the drugs used. I completely understand not revealing the law enforcement and/or doctors involved; but the drugs themselves? The only reasons I can think of for that is that they're using anesthetics and the general public would freak out if they really realized what happens to them when they're put under for surgery; and that the media would talk about what a horrific death was caused by the drugs, no matter which ones they used.

 

[JayDubya]

Noting for the record that none of you are, among other things, strict Constitutionalists. That goes for the folks like Bob who thanked you, too.

If one were to operate on strict originalism, one would note that the death penalty was a common punishment in the late 1700s in America.

If we are to conduct executions, then there would be nothing wrong with firing squad or hanging as opposed to other methods - what is wrong with the death penalty is not in HOW it is conducted, and it is not a matter of the death penalty violating the Constitution in any way, as it does not.

 

[Thom Paine]

Noting for the record that none of you are, among other things, strict Constitutionalists. That goes for the folks like Bob who thanked you, too.

I'm flawed in many ways, the death penalty being one of them. Sorry but I don't feel anything for these death row people that commit Horrific and Violent murders.

Again ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said

and I don't see any corollary.. ???? Exactly what are you referencing in your observation ?

Good eve TED

Thom Paine

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Well, when I really think about it, I'm surprised FOIA doesn't cover the drugs used. I completely understand not revealing the law enforcement and/or doctors involved; but the drugs themselves?

My feeling exactly.

The only reasons I can think of for that is that they're using anesthetics and the general public would freak out if they really realized what happens to them when they're put under for surgery; and that the media would talk about what a horrific death was caused by the drugs, no matter which ones they used.

Either they can carry out capital punishment because it's the law regardless of what the general public thinks, or they can do the public's business in a way the public won't find objectionable, but I don't see why they should be allowed to keep a state secret that isn't a state secret.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

I'm flawed in many ways, the death penalty being one of them. Sorry but I don't feel anything for these death row people that commit Horrific and Violent murders.

Seeing as how you freely admit your flaws, I've nothing else to do but tip my hat to you.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

I am ambivalent about the death penalty mainly because I don't like a government having that power. but the scum bags who truly deserve getting whack are getting off easy these days. up to a couple centuries ago. pain was part of the punishment. people who murdered others (or in some cases, much lesser offenses) had such wonderful experiences as being broken on the wheel, drawn and quartered (which included one's "package" being cut off with a red hot knife, and slow disembowelment) anal impalement, the rack, burning alive, boiling in oil, and the disgusting device known as the pear

the constitution prevents CRUEL punishment but does not guarantee a pain free one

I bolded the important portion of your post. That said, while I agree that it's all but impossible to kill someone painlessly, there is a significant difference between pain-free and some of the executions witnessed recently as states try out state-secret drug cocktails.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

If one were to operate on strict originalism, one would note that the death penalty was a common punishment in the late 1700s in America.

I offered no argument that the 8th Amendment bars capital punishment.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Again ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ What he said

and I don't see any corollary.. ???? Exactly what are you referencing in your observation ?

Good eve TED

Thom Paine

Not caring how an inmate is put to death means you lack regard for the 8th Amendment, which means you can't possibly be a strict Constitutionalist.

 

[TurtleDude]

I bolded the important portion of your post. That said, while I agree that it's all but impossible to kill someone painlessly, there is a significant difference between pain-free and some of the executions witnessed recently as states try out state-secret drug cocktails.

the purpose of death by injection was to sanitize the DP and make it painless-like putting to sleep a sick pet

none of the violence of snapping the neck with a noose or the disgusting byproducts of frying someone with electricity or the incredibly painful (for a minute or so) cyanide gas or the blood splatter of a firing squad.

why vets humanely put down millions of dogs, cats, and horses each year and the same cannot be done with a murderer is probably due to some idiotic regulations

so go back to hanging the bastards. its fast, cheap, humane and doesn't ruin the organs.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

the purpose of death by injection was to sanitize the DP and make it painless-like putting to sleep a sick pet

none of the violence of snapping the neck with a noose or the disgusting byproducts of frying someone with electricity or the incredibly painful (for a minute or so) cyanide gas or the blood splatter of a firing squad.

why vets humanely put down millions of dogs, cats, and horses each year and the same cannot be done with a murderer is probably due to some idiotic regulations

so go back to hanging the bastards. its fast, cheap, humane and doesn't ruin the organs.

I very sincerely doubt that regulations are the problem when it comes to how inmates are executed by lethal injection. The state defines how it is done.

While I vehemently oppose capital punishment in general, if we're going to have it then I don't have a problem with hanging -- if it is done within the strictest of parameters. Drop, snap, done.

 

[TurtleDude]

I very sincerely doubt that regulations are the problem when it comes to how inmates are executed by lethal injection. The state defines how it is done.

While I vehemently oppose capital punishment in general, if we're going to have it then I don't have a problem with hanging -- if it is done within the strictest of parameters. Drop, snap, done.

years ago, someone at Yale managed to find in the library (which was huge) an army manual on hanging prisoners. It had the specific drop (i.e. how long the rope was) based on the weight of the condemned to guarantee an instantaneous death. How the army had come to these specifications, I cannot recall. I remember some fat POS slob protested hanging (it was one of two methods allowed in one state-the other was Lethal injection and this guy was so obese a vein probably couldn't be found) on the grounds he was so fat his head would pop off

and my attitude was Who cares-that's a guaranteed instantaneous death.

 

[Thom Paine]

Not caring how an inmate is put to death means you lack regard for the 8th Amendment, which means you can't possibly be a strict Constitutionalist.

If that's the way you interpret my statement .. okay.. we have different definitions cruel/inhumane . After reading the entire thread I could also sign my name to TD's statements.

I might go even further by suggesting.. IF.. someone is without a doubt caught in the act of a death penalty crime that person should be summarily shot on the spot... period.
While I,too, am uncomfortable with the Gov. taking a life there are times it is fitting punishment and someone must perform the act.
It is reasonable to expect a murderer inflicted possibly ghastly pain upon a victim; I see no reason to spare the culprit from a like experience.

You suggest this attitude is flawed; I believe it is just.

okay

Have a good eve TED

Thom Paine

 

[jamesrage]

If the state needs to keep a secret for any reason other than either state security or to protect the rights of an individual, then it is doing something wrong.

Conservatives talk about the wonders of the free market all the time, but I guess that's just for when it's convenient.

The only reason the piece of **** and his lawyer want to know the drug combinations is so scumbag sympathizers can harass the makers and distributors of those drugs.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

The only reason the piece of **** and his lawyer want to know the drug combinations is so scumbag sympathizers can harass the makers and distributors of those drugs.

As is their god-given right. The manufacturers of drugs used to execute have no inherent right to secrecy and the public's interests are not served by that secrecy. If you keep the drugs secret, then there's nothing stopping the government from using any methodology they wish.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Noting for the record that none of you are, among other things, strict Constitutionalists. That goes for the folks like Bob who thanked you, too.

Actually there is nothing in the Constitution which prohibits the death penalty. But there is a way in which the Constitution gives the power to the Government to use the death penalty. Or do you think that the government doesn't have the power to legislate punishments for breaking laws?