Justices Seem Split on Lethal Injection Method

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court justices sounded split along conservative and liberal lines Wednesday during arguments on whether injections may be a cruel and painful method of execution.

 The justices are not likely to decide that ultimate question in the Florida case at hand, which focuses on a narrow issue. But the arguments offered insights into how the Supreme Court views the controversial issue of how best to put someone to death. 



 The justices took up a Florida case to settle a procedural issue. Can a state death-row inmate who has appealed a conviction and lost in the federal courts file a new, last-minute claim in federal court to challenge the state's method of execution? 



 Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Antonin Scalia suggested the answer should be "no." Otherwise, inmates will use the new suits to further delay their executions, they said. The chief justice said he was "willing to bet" that if Florida changed its method of execution, defense lawyers would immediately challenge that as well. 



 In January, lawyers for Florida murderer Clarence Hill won a last-minute stay for their client on the day he faced execution. He was condemned to die for the 1982 slaying of police officer. 



 His appeal cited new medical studies that suggested one of the drugs used in executions may mask the inmate's pain by paralyzing his muscles. 



 Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg asked a Florida lawyer what a judge should do if the evidence showed the drug concoction would cause "excruciating pain" for the dying man. 



 Florida state lawyer Carolyn Snurkowski said nothing should be done because the condemned man had failed to suggest a better alternative. 



 That answer did not sit well with several of the justices. That "strikes me as a little odd," said Justice Stephen G. Breyer. Why should the inmate, not the state, be responsible for finding a humane method of execution? asked Justice Anthony M. Kennedy. 



 Justice John Paul Stevens, a part-time resident of Florida, noted that the state had adopted new regulations to ensure that dogs and cats are put to death without pain. He noted that a group of veterinarians had filed a brief in Hill's case saying the drugs used in Florida's execution chamber "would be problematic if applied to dogs and cats," Stevens said. 



 If Kennedy were to join with the court's liberal bloc in the Florida case, the Supreme Court could rule that federal judges should consider claims that a state's lethal injection causes cruel and unusual punishment.