Sometimes the United States Supreme Court does surprising things and the usual ideological alignments get scrambled.
it handed down a surprising death penalty decision but we need to look carefully to understand why they defied expectations.
Ruling in favor of Nance and giving a victory to death penalty opponents was also required, Kagan explained, to respect a line of three cases in which, in 2005, 2009 and 2015
the court had turned back challenges to lethal injection. And it was not lost on Kagan that the chief justice authored the majority opinion in Baze v. Rees, the first of those cases.
the court had turned back challenges to lethal injection. And it was not lost on Kagan that the chief justice authored the majority opinion in Baze v. Rees, the first of those cases.
The Supreme Court’s decision allows him to continue his legal challenge to lethal injection, but he is unlikely to prevail on the merits.
And in all of American history, the Supreme Court has never sided with a condemned inmate in any methods-of-execution case.
They provided the votes to deliver a temporary victory to death penalty opponents and to Nance. But they did so with full confidence that he will be executed nonetheless.