Alabama plans to conduct its inaugural nitrogen gas execution, while attorneys request the U.S. Supreme Court to examine the alleged violation
OAN’s Abril Elfi
10:17 AM – Monday, January 22, 2024
Alabama is gearing up for its first-ever nitrogen gas execution. However, the inmate’s legal team is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether this execution would violate the U.S. Constitution. They argue that since it is the state’s second attempt to execute their client, it raises constitutional concerns.
Lawyers representing Kenneth Eugene Smith, an inmate on Alabama’s death row who is set to become the first person to be executed by nitrogen hypoxia this week, have filed a request with the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to consider whether Smith’s execution would violate the Constitution. They argue that since this is the state’s second attempt at carrying out the death penalty, and the first attempt had “gone wrong” due to reasons the state ”should have known about,” it raises constitutional concerns.
Two separate juries found Smith guilty of killing Elizabeth Dorlene Sennett in 1988 in Colbert County, Alabama, as part of a murder-for-hire plot. Sennett, who was a pastor’s wife, endured repeated beatings and stabbings. Smith confessed to his involvement in the murder and has been on death row since 1996.
Smith is scheduled to be executed on Thursday using nitrogen hypoxia, which, if carried out, would mark the first use of lethal injection since its introduction in 1982.
The state claims that the use of nitrogen gas will render the victim unconscious rapidly. However, opponents argue that this untested method of execution is akin to unethical human experiments.
Smith had previously challenged the state’s decision to execute him via lethal injection, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state last year. However, the SCOTUS declined to reconsider the decision of a lower court that upheld Smith’s right to die via fatal gas injection instead of injection.
“It is undeniable that ADOC caused Mr. Smith actual physical and psychological pain by repeatedly attempting (and failing) to establish IV access through his arms, hands, and a central line while he was strapped to a gurney for hours,” stated Smith’s lawyers in their request to the Supreme Court. “ADOC’s failed attempt to execute Mr. Smith caused him severe physical pain and psychological torment, including posttraumatic stress disorder.”
They further questioned the Supreme Court, asking if “a second attempt to execute a condemned person following a single, cruelly willful attempt to execute that same person violates the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”
Smith’s request to the Supreme Court revolves around the constitutionality of a state attempting to execute a person twice after the first attempt failed. This issue has only been previously considered by the court in one instance, where a prisoner in Louisiana escaped an electric chair execution due to a mechanical malfunction. The court ruled, with a 5-4 decision, that the second attempt would not be unconstitutional under the 8th Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments.
In their court brief, Smith’s attorneys referenced a 1947 ruling from one of the justices’ opinions that supported the majority’s decision.
“Does [that] not mean that a hypothetical situation, which assumes a series of abortive attempts at electrocution or even a single, cruelly willful attempt, would not raise different questions?” wrote Justice Felix Frankfurter in response to the decision not to block the second execution attempt in that particular case.
Stay informed! Subscribe here to receive breaking news blasts directly to your inbox for free. https://www.oann.com/alerts
As antisemitism continues to rise on college campuses, one group is forming to counter hatred, by supporting Palestine’s war against Israel.
with Rep. Jeff Van Drew
with Gabe Eltaeb
with Sheriff Mark Lamb
AI startup ElevenLabs gained unicorn status as surging investor interest for generative AI technology sends startup valuations soaring.
Binance is due to square off against the SEC next week in another high-profile hearing involving a crypto exchange that could define how cryptocurrencies are regulated.
Executives at the WEF say they are grappling with how to turn early demos into money-makers.
Apple ended Samsung Electronics’ 12-year reign as the largest seller of smartphones in the world.
rnrn
Why is the inmate’s legal team questioning the constitutionality of a second attempt to execute their client after the first attempt failed
Alabama’s First Nitrogen Gas Execution Faces Constitutional Challenge
Alabama is preparing for its first-ever nitrogen gas execution, but the inmate’s legal team is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether this execution would violate the U.S. Constitution. The legal team argues that since it is the state’s second attempt to execute their client, it raises constitutional concerns.
Kenneth Eugene Smith, an inmate on Alabama’s death row, is set to become the first person to be executed by nitrogen hypoxia this week. His lawyers have filed a request with the U.S. Supreme Court to consider whether Smith’s execution would violate the Constitution. They contend that since this is the state’s second attempt at carrying out the death penalty, and the first attempt went wrong due to reasons the state should have known about, it raises constitutional concerns.
Smith was found guilty of killing Elizabeth Dorlene Sennett in 1988 in Colbert County, Alabama, as part of a murder-for-hire plot. Sennett, a pastor’s wife, suffered repeated beatings and stabbings. Smith confessed to his involvement in the murder and has been on death row since 1996.
Smith is scheduled to be executed on Thursday using nitrogen hypoxia, which would mark the first use of this method of execution since its introduction in 1982. The state argues that the use of nitrogen gas will render the victim unconscious rapidly. However, opponents argue that this untested method of execution is akin to unethical human experiments.
Previously, Smith challenged the state’s decision to execute him via lethal injection, but the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the state last year. However, the court declined to reconsider the decision of a lower court that upheld Smith’s right to die via fatal gas injection instead of injection.
In their request to the Supreme Court, Smith’s lawyers highlighted the physical and psychological pain caused by the state’s repeated failed attempts to establish IV access during previous execution attempts. They argue that ADOC’s failed attempt to execute Smith caused him severe physical pain and psychological torment, including post-traumatic stress disorder.
Furthermore, they question if a second attempt to execute a condemned person following a single, cruelly willful attempt violates the prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.
Smith’s request to the Supreme Court focuses on the constitutionality of a state attempting to execute a person twice after the first attempt failed. This issue has only been previously considered by the court in one instance, where a prisoner in Louisiana escaped an electric chair execution due to a mechanical malfunction. The court ruled, with a 5-4 decision, that the second attempt would not be unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments.
Smith’s attorneys referenced a 1947 ruling in their court brief, in which one of the justices’ opinions supported the argument that a second attempt to execute a person after the first unsuccessful attempt would violate the Constitution.
The U.S. Supreme Court will now review Smith’s request and decide whether his execution would indeed violate the U.S. Constitution. This case raises important questions about the limits of state power and the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishments.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...