Finally, the Baze v. Rees decision is in. If you want get the shorthand version of the 100 page, 7-2 plurality decision, SCOTUSBlog has it covered. There are probably another dozen blawgs that are busily commenting on the Supremes ruling that lethal injection is constitutional.
The Court’s plurality adopted as a standard for assessing the validity of an execution method whether it poses a “substantial risk of serious harm.” It rejected the death row inmate’s proposal that the standard be “unnecessary risk.”
And that pretty much sums up the big picture.
Now for the little picture. Justice Scalia and that other justice have a concurring opinion. Who woulda guessed?
From the official SCOTUS syllabus:
JUSTICE THOMAS, joined by JUSTICE SCALIA, concluded that the plurality’s formulation of the governing standard finds no support in the original understanding of the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause or in this Court’s previous method-of-execution cases; casts constitutional doubt on long-accepted methods of execution; and injects the Court into matters it has no institutional capacity to resolve. The historical practices leading to the Clause’s inclusion in the Bill of Rights, the views of early commentators on the Constitution, and this Court’s cases, see, e.g., Wilkerson v. Utah, 99 U. S. 130, 135–136, all demonstrate that an execution method violates the Eighth Amendment only if it is deliberately designed to inflict pain. Judged under that standard, this is an easy case: Because it is undisputed that Kentucky adopted its lethal injection protocol in an effort to make capital punishment more humane, not to add elements of terror, pain, or disgrace to the death penalty, petitioners’ challenge must fail.
We are a kind and merciful people, you see. The point of the 8th Amendment cruel and inhuman clause is to prohibit any method of execution deliberately designed to inflict pain. It should kill, but not deliberately hurt.
For example, drawing and quartering? Out. Hanging. In. Iron Maiden? Out. Firing Squad? In. Embowling alive? Out. Embowling dead? The jury is out. Gibbeting? I didn’t know what this was until today. But it appears this too depends on whether it’s alive gibbeting or dead gibbeting. Well, that will have to await a further decision.
It’s all about intent. So as Edgar Allen Poe suggests, kill them with kindness. And that’s all you need to know about executing people in America.
Discover more from Simple Justice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Guillotine? In.
Pro death penalty folks should love it. For its deterrent factor, of course. And really, you probably can’t get anything much quicker.
But a needle in arm while in the basement of a prison at midnight? What kind of deterrent is that? If you’re gonna do it, you might as well get the full benefit, right?
That was part of my point when I first discussed Baze. We’re talking about killing people here.
Talk about a Kafkaesque case. Not only would primetime public executions serve that beloved deterrence, but it would make for some terrific revenue enhancers. If you’re going to be absurd, make it pay.
While pay per view is an interesting idea, I think it should be free.
On the courthouse steps.
You are such a barbarian.