Source:
Think Progress Just over a week ago, the Supreme Court denied a stay of execution to an Oklahoma inmate named Charles Warner over the dissent of the Court’s four more liberal members. According to Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent, the drug cocktail that Oklahoma planned to use on Warner was too likely to result in the “needless infliction of severe pain” to be permissible under the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishments. Sotomayor, however, only garnered four votes for her position, and she needed five to halt the execution.
Nevertheless, on Friday, just over a week after Warner received a fatal dose of the poisonous cocktail Sotomayor criticized in her opinion, the Supreme Court announced that it would hear Warner’s case after all.
Under normal circumstances, Warner’s death would moot his case. Subject only to narrow exceptions, the Supreme Court only has jurisdiction over cases where a decision in a particularly party’s favor is likely to redress an injury that party experienced. And the justices only have the power to destroy life. They do not have the power to resurrect the dead.
Warner, however, is one of four death row inmates who challenged the use of a potentially unreliable sedative that may allow inmates to experience considerable pain during their executions. The other three, at least as of this writing, are still alive.
Read more:
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/01/26/3615214/supreme-court-allows-oklahoma-execute-man-decide-take-case/
Just a note to the Pope: If ever some Catholics needed excommunication...
This is evil AND malicious.