How Would You Like to Die? Glossip v. Gross Deals Blow to Abolitionists

After capital punishment opponents’ pressure on drug suppliers reduced the lethal injection drug supply, Oklahoma began using midazolam, resulting in botched executions. Condemned inmates sought to stop use of this lethal injection protocol. In Glossip v. Gross, the U.S. Supreme Court found inmates...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Rowe, Brenda I. (Autor)
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2018
En: The prison journal
Año: 2018, Volumen: 98, Número: 1, Páginas: 83-103
Acceso en línea: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:
Eighth Amendment
Capital Punishment
Cruel and unusual punishment
Execution
Lethal injection
Descripción
Sumario:After capital punishment opponents’ pressure on drug suppliers reduced the lethal injection drug supply, Oklahoma began using midazolam, resulting in botched executions. Condemned inmates sought to stop use of this lethal injection protocol. In Glossip v. Gross, the U.S. Supreme Court found inmates failed to establish that such protocols entail a substantial risk of severe pain compared with available alternatives, undermining the supply side attack strategy and leaving inmates facing the possibility of an unnecessarily painful execution. This article places the Glossip decision within the context of method of execution jurisprudence and discusses implications for the ongoing battle over capital punishment.
ISSN:1552-7522
DOI:10.1177/0032885517743716