Controversy over the use of the death penalty has recently reignited. On January

Question

Controversy over the use of the death penalty has recently reignited. On January 16, 2014, 53-year-old Dennis McGuire, who was sentenced to death for raping and fatally stabbing a young pregnant woman in 1989, took 26 minutes to die by lethal injection, gasping repeatedly as he lay on a gurney with his mouth opening and closing. The state of Ohio used a previously untried drug combination because European and American manufacturers of the previously used drugs banned sales to the U.S. penal system on legal and ethical grounds. Five years earlier, in Baze v. Rees (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether Kentucky's lethal injection protocol violated the Eighth Amendment. Chief Justice Roberts wrote the opinion of the Court.

Petitioners in this case—each convicted of a double homicide—acknowledge that the lethal injection procedure, if applied as intended, will result in a humane death. They nevertheless contend that the lethal injection protocol is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment's ban on "cruel and unusual punishments," because of the risk that the protocol's terms might not be properly followed, resulting in significant pain. Petitioners contend that there is a risk of improper administration of thiopental because the doses are difficult to mix into solution form and load into syringes; because the protocol fails to establish a rate of injection, which could lead to a failure of the IV; because it is possible that the IV catheters will infiltrate into surrounding tissue, causing an inadequate dose to be delivered to the vein; because of inadequate facilities and training; and because Kentucky has no reliable means of monitoring the anesthetic depth of the prisoner after the sodium thiopental has been administered. In light of expert testimony regarding safeguards to protect against the maladministration of the procedure, we cannot say that the risks identified by petitioners are so substantial or imminent as to amount to an Eighth Amendment violation.

The passage above presents two arguments, one from the petitioners and one from the Court. How can you tell the difference between them?

Explanation / Answer

This case clearly tells about what were the arguments of the petitioner and what were the counter arguments of the court based on which the court awarded the decision.

The petitioner signed for illegality of lethal injection procedure for capital punishment. They provided their arguemnets all against the use of such procdeures such as it results in significant pain , risk of improper administration of thiopental etc.

The arguemnets which are not against the procedure are from the court side that includes "In light of expert testimony regarding safeguards to protect against the maladministration of the procedure, we cannot say that the risks identified by petitioners are so substantial or imminent as to amount to an Eighth Amendment violation."

Clearly the difference lies in one party claiming that the eighth amendment is violated and the other claiming no evidences of such amendment are found.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse C
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.