Legal News

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Death Penalty Is Constitutional
Download PDF
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading...

Glossip v Gross

Summary: The Glossip v. Gross case over the use of midazolam in Oklahoma’s three-drug protocol concluded, with another close vote, that there isn’t enough factual evidence that the drug does not work.

It has been 25 years since there were two justices sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court that were unwaveringly opposed to the death penalty. The late William Brennan Jr. and Thurgood Marshall have been replaced by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer in the debate over the lethal-injection drugs.

  
What
Where


Brennan and Marshall opposed every death penalty case that came before them, citing that the act went against the Eighth Amendment’s stance on cruel and unusual punishment. Ginsburg and Breyer’s dissenting vote in Glossip v. Gross may be an indication that they intend to oppose every death penalty case as well.

Breyer argued that as a nation we cannot have a death penalty that “serves legitimate penological purposes” and a procedural system that “seeks reliability and fairness” in its application. He believes, as does Ginsburg, that evidence from the past 40 years supports this issue and concludes that the “death penalty violates the Eighth Amendment”.

Justice Antonin Scalia responded to Breyer, just as he did when Justice John Paul Stevens concluded in 2008 that the death penalty was unconstitutional in a lethal-injection case. This time Scalia provided a separate response where he used the same-sex marriage ruling in his statement. He contended that just because five vocal justices took away the ability for the people to decide what they wanted does not give them the right to take away the death penalty too. He emphasized that it is does not violate the Constitution.

Get JD Journal in Your Mail

Subscribe to our FREE daily news alerts and get the latest updates on the most happening events in the legal, business, and celebrity world. You also get your daily dose of humor and entertainment!!




The group of death row inmates comprising Glossip was fighting the use of the sedative drug midazolam in Oklahoma. The drug, usually prescribed for anxiety, is used in Oklahoma’s three-drug protocol. The inmates claimed that this drug, which is administered first, does not properly desensitize the inmate to pain. The court arguments for this case were some of the most contentious of this term. Justice Samuel Alito Jr. wrote the majority opinion, accusing the “abolitionists” of the death penalty, including the lawyers in the case, of creating a “guerilla war” by making the availability of the necessary drugs limited.

The majority opinion went on to explain that the inmates failed to back up their claim by identifying an alternative method, required by Baze v. Rees. The other reason the case failed was that the district court did not commit an error by finding that the inmates failed to prove the risks of the drug.



Source: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/supremecourtbrief/home/id=1202730914277?slreturn=20150530135451

Photo: phillipsmurrah.com



 

BCG FEATURED JOB

Locations:

Keyword:



Search Now

Senior Antitrust Associate Attorney

USA-CA-San Diego

San Diego office of our client seeks Senior Antitrust Associate Attorney with 7 years of experience....

Apply Now

Senior Antitrust Attorney

USA-WA-Seattle

Seattle office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks Senior Antitrust Attorney with 9 y...

Apply Now

Patent Attorney

USA-DC-Washington

Washington, D.C. office of a BCG Attorney Search Top Ranked Law Firm seeks Patent Attorney with 1 ye...

Apply Now

RELEVANT JOBS

Appellate Director, Enforcement

USA-MD-Rockville

Rockville (Omega)   NYC (Brookfield Place) ...

Apply now

Litigation Director

USA-MD-Rockville

The Litigation Director manages a team of dedicated litigation attorneys and other staff, and, as ne...

Apply now

Senior Litigation Counel

USA-MD-Rockville

Job Description Essential Job Functions: Represent FINRA in a first or second chair capacit...

Apply now

Paralegal, Immigration Law (NIV)

USA-CA-Agoura Hills

Immigration Law Paralegal (NIV) (5+ years’ experience) We are looking for dedicated, detai...

Apply now

Most Popular

SEARCH IN ARCHIVE

To Top