At 1:23 a.m. on Saturday, the Trump administration completed its thirteenth and remaining execution. Dustin Higgs, a Black man who had been scheduled to die on Martin Luther King Jr.’s birthday, was put to demise whereas affected by COVID-19.
Like those that had been executed earlier than him, there have been in depth unresolved authorized issues with Higgs’ case. However just like the earlier executions, on the day the federal authorities needed Higgs to die, the Supreme Courtroom rapidly allotted with these points and allowed the killing to proceed, only some hours not on time. The justices didn’t clarify why. There was no obvious cause, apart from submitting to then-President Donald Trump’s want to execute as many individuals as attainable earlier than leaving workplace.
It was a unprecedented and irreversible miscarriage of justice that capped a traditionally unprecedented six-month killing spree. From the Trump administration’s first executions in July 2020 to the ultimate ones final week, the Supreme Courtroom sided with the federal government each time, repeatedly permitting the rushed killings of individuals with excellent authorized claims. A few of those that confronted the demise penalty had future hearings scheduled earlier than decrease courts, wiped away by the Supreme Courtroom so their execution may proceed on schedule earlier than Trump left workplace.
“This unprecedented rush of federal executions has predictably given rise to many troublesome authorized disputes,” Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a fiery dissent final Friday evening in Higgs’ case. “Towards this backdrop of deep authorized uncertainty, the [Department of Justice] didn’t tread fastidiously,” Sotomayor continued, detailing the federal government’s efforts to fast-track the killings “earlier than courts had significant alternatives to find out if the executions had been authorized.”
At a time when the Supreme Courtroom ought to have served as a test on the manager department’s zealous pursuit of capital punishment, it as a substitute rubber-stamped the killings, lending a false sense of legitimacy to the method. “All through this expedited spree of executions, this Courtroom has constantly rejected inmates’ credible claims for reduction. The Courtroom has even intervened to elevate stays of execution that decrease courts put in place, thereby making certain these prisoners’ challenges would by no means obtain a significant airing,” Sotomayor wrote.
The Supreme Courtroom typically made these life-or-death selections in a matter of hours, with no public clarification of the court docket’s reasoning. “This isn’t justice,” Sotomayor wrote. “After ready nearly 20 years to renew federal executions, the Authorities ought to have proceeded with some measure of restraint to make sure it did so lawfully. When it didn’t, this Courtroom ought to have. It has not.”
One-third of the justices on the excessive court docket had been nominated to their lifetime posts by a president who was elected by a minority of voters and who was impeached twice, most just lately for inciting a violent riot in opposition to the U.S. Capitol to protest his reelection loss. The views of these justices could have sealed the destiny of most of the 13 folks put to demise since July — and will affect different folks on federal demise row for many years to come back.
The problems the Supreme Courtroom sidestepped in permitting executions to proceed are basic to the legality of the demise penalty as practiced. There may be ongoing litigation in regards to the federal authorities’s present technique of execution, a deadly overdose of pentobarbital. Autopsies present that the method typically causes pulmonary edema, a medical situation that induces the feeling of drowning or suffocating. The federal district court docket in Washington, D.C., has issued a number of preliminary injunctions, together with one stating that demise row prisoners had demonstrated they had been doubtless to reach proving the execution protocol violates the Eighth Modification’s prohibition on merciless and strange punishment. However every time the difficulty made it to the Supreme Courtroom, the justices allowed the executions to proceed.
“A layperson may say, ‘In the event you don’t know whether or not it’s authorized, are you able to go forward and do it?’ And most of the people would say, ‘In fact not,’” Robert Dunham, the manager director of the Loss of life Penalty Info Middle, mentioned in an interview. “However that’s not the trail the Supreme Courtroom has taken.”
Wesley Purkey and Lisa Montgomery had been killed regardless of credible proof that neither of them was mentally competent to be executed. Brandon Bernard was killed with out getting the possibility to current proof that the federal government had secured his demise sentence by withholding exculpatory data. Alfred Bourgeois and Corey Johnson had been killed regardless of credible proof that that they had mental disabilities that made them ineligible for the demise penalty. Johnson and Higgs had been killed although there was credible medical proof that lung injury from their bouts with COVID-19 may make their executions torturously and unconstitutionally painful.
The one method that these case outcomes will be reconciled with the rule of regulation is in the event you suppose the rule of regulation means, ‘If the federal authorities needs a prisoner useless, the prisoner is useless.’
Robert Dunham, government director of the Loss of life Penalty Info Middle
Maybe the Supreme Courtroom’s most beautiful disregard for due course of got here on Jan. 15, the Friday evening Higgs was scheduled to be executed. Federal regulation requires executions to be performed within the method approved by the state the place the conviction occurred. Higgs was convicted in Maryland, which has since abolished the demise penalty. The federal government had requested a federal district court docket to permit him to be executed within the method approved in Indiana, the place Higgs was imprisoned on federal demise row. The district court docket denied the federal government’s request and the federal government appealed to the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the 4th Circuit. The appellate court docket set oral arguments for Jan. 27, one week into the administration of President Joe Biden, who is anticipated to halt federal executions.
Intent on killing Higgs earlier than leaving workplace, the Trump administration requested the Supreme Courtroom to intervene. Late Friday evening, the excessive court docket acquiesced to the federal government’s request and allowed Higgs’ execution to go ahead. Higgs was pronounced useless somewhat greater than two hours later.
It was an unprecedented move, in accordance with authorized specialists. “The Courtroom didn’t simply elevate a decrease keep, however issued a abstract ruling on the deserves of the case although the court docket of appeals hadn’t but completed so,” Steve Vladeck, a professor on the College of Texas College of Legislation, explained on Twitter. “And all to expedite an execution.”
The transfer was per the Supreme Courtroom’s refusal to deal with points raised within the earlier execution circumstances. “Each contested movement that was filed within the U.S. Supreme Courtroom was determined in favor of execution over the course of 13 circumstances. The one method that these case outcomes will be reconciled with the rule of regulation is in the event you suppose the rule of regulation means, ‘If the federal authorities needs a prisoner useless, the prisoner is useless.’ That’s the one method that you could reconcile what the courts did,” Dunham mentioned.
“It regarded like rubber-stamping. It regarded like result-orientation,” Dunham continued. “They knew the end result earlier than the papers ever got here to them.”
The Supreme Courtroom’s refusal to delay executions turned so clear to these on demise row that some stopped trying to it for reduction. Earlier than he was killed, Christopher Vialva informed anti-death penalty lawyer Ashley Kincaid Eve that he didn’t need her to file a last-minute problem to his execution, The Intercept reported. Vialva knew that Daniel Lewis Lee, the primary particular person to be executed by the Trump administration, waited on the gurney for 4 hours whereas his attorneys fought, unsuccessfully, to avoid wasting his life. That wasn’t how Vialva needed to spend his remaining hours.
After ready nearly 20 years to renew federal executions, the Authorities ought to have proceeded with some measure of restraint to make sure it did so lawfully. When it didn’t, this Courtroom ought to have. It has not.
Supreme Courtroom Justice Sonia Sotomayor
The decrease courts had been complicit, too. In November, two males incarcerated on the federal jail in Terre Haute, Indiana — the place demise row is situated — filed a class-action lawsuit to cease the executions till the coronavirus pandemic had ended or till the prisoners had acquired the vaccine. The 2 males, Patrick R. Smith and Brandon S. Holm, usually are not sentenced to die. They’re on observe to be launched in 2022 and 2023, respectively. However they fearful that the executions, which have been linked to COVID-19 outbreaks all through the jail, put them at pointless danger of contracting the possibly deadly illness.
Their litigation revealed that a number of Bureau of Jail staffers had examined constructive for the coronavirus after working executions and that, in an effort to cover the id of these concerned in executions, the federal government had uncared for to do thorough contact tracing.
Chief Choose Jane Magnus-Stinson, who oversees the U.S. District Courtroom for the Southern District of Indiana, discovered that Smith and Holm had “offered credible, compelling proof that they face a considerably elevated danger of contracting COVID-19” absent intervention by the court docket. However the authorities additionally had a “substantial authorized curiosity” in finishing up the executions immediately, she mentioned. The choose settled on a compromise: The federal government may proceed its executions so long as it abided by sure precautions, together with requiring employees to put on masks, sustaining contact logs, growing testing, and doing contact tracing.
Final Thursday’s execution of Corey Johnson was the primary since these guidelines had been put in place by the court docket. Based on a media witness and Johnson’s non secular adviser, two executioners eliminated their masks for at the least a part of the execution. The subsequent day, Smith and Holm filed an emergency movement, citing proof that the federal government had violated the court docket order. They requested the choose to halt Higgs’ execution, scheduled for later that day, or at the least ban the 2 individuals who had eliminated their masks from collaborating.
In its response, the federal government admitted that the 2 people had eliminated their masks, however claimed their motion was temporary and crucial to speak clearly. The federal government argued that the court docket order hadn’t been violated as a result of the choose, in directing the federal government to “implement masks necessities,” didn’t particularly state that masks needed to keep on the entire time.
It was an absurd argument. It’s, after all, attainable to speak whereas sporting a masks, as important staff all through the nation have completed for months. And if the federal government insists it isn’t attainable, that’s an admission that executions can’t be carried out safely throughout the pandemic.
Nonetheless, the court docket sided with the federal government and allowed Higgs’ execution to proceed and for each execution crew members to take part.
Earlier this week, a brand new president was inaugurated, one who says he’ll work to finish the demise penalty. Biden is unlikely to schedule extra federal executions — though state executions will doubtless proceed, for now — however the judges who failed to make use of their super energy to avoid wasting lives could stay of their posts for years to come back.
“The U.S. Supreme Courtroom has misplaced legitimacy on this difficulty,” Dunham mentioned. “Perhaps with a brand new president and a distinct setting they will come again and be precise judges on these circumstances. However possibly it implies that Congress has to amend the regulation to restrict their capability to ignore it.”
Calling all HuffPost superfans!
Join membership to turn into a founding member and assist form HuffPost’s subsequent chapter