Deborah Denno quoted by Boursorama (France) from an Agence France-Presse story about her expertise in death penalty cases and the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to take up Glossip v. Gross.
Deborah Denno, an expert on execution methods at Fordham University Law School, said it was “amazing” that the Supreme Court examines again lethal injection, illustrating it by the “problems” of the death penalty in the United States.
Question: Why the Supreme Court she left before running one of the complainants to take up the case?
Answer: This is a big surprise that she seized a second case of lethal injection in seven years. The final was decided in 2008. Seven years is a short period to justice, it is a dog year is very unusual. She did (one month) after refusing to postpone the execution of one of the four complainants (Charles Warner). That Senior Court seizes a method of execution for the second time in seven years, it’s really amazing. Clearly, the Court sees that there are problems, and it does not look good for the death penalty.
“Baze v. Rees” (in 2008) was not a strong decision, it was ineffective because the Court was sharply divided (…). It was a very fragmented decision which does not guide the states to adopt their execution protocols.
And the situation has changed. Now we will be able to see how the Court takes it with all the practical consequences that occurred, lack of products, botched executions, etc., all these difficulties that did not exist in 2008.
Q: What are the challenges today?
A: In general, the Supreme Court likes to stay as limited as possible. But she still has the option to settle more widely. If (the nine judges) want to make a position on the constitutionality of lethal injection, they can do so using this folder.
The first issue that concerns (potential suffering caused by) midazolam (without mentioning it explicitly) can be applied to Oklahoma but also to all states like Florida that use midazolam. That said, as other countries begin to adopt other products of the same type, this could be applied more widely.
The second and third questions invoke similar criteria that apply to all states using lethal injection.
And who knows, they may also talk about other methods of execution, as everything seems connected. It is not very clear, but it seems unlikely that the Court considers the constitutionality of same alternative methods.
Q: What impact will the debate in the high court on the landscape of capital punishment in the United States?
A: “. Glossip v Oklahoma” The complaint already having an impact, and the three killings that have gone wrong. We saw many states have suspended executions pending the decision of the Supreme Court. We have three states have turned to alternative potential to lethal injection, electrocution with Tennessee, Utah with the firing squad and Oklahoma, which adopted the inhalation of nitrogen as Plan B , after the Supreme Court is seized of the complaint. So the Supreme Court already has an effect on the States, although it has not yet rendered its decision.
Read the entire Agence France-Presse article.