Georgia death row inmate argues for death by firing squad, wins case

A death row inmate in Georgia argued for and convinced the Supreme Court last week to allow him to die by the method of his choosing – by firing squad. Although it’s being allowed, the state’s only authorized method of execution currently is by lethal injection.

In 2002, Michael Nance was sentenced to death after being convicted of murder for shooting a bystander to death following a 1993 bank robbery in which he was involved.

The Supreme Court has ruled in favor of a death row inmate who is challenging Georgia's lethal injection protocol and seeks to die by firing squad https://t.co/s9td7GWonW

— CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) June 23, 2022

Nance successfully made the argument that the sedatives administered in accordance with Georgia procedures for lethal injection would ultimately be compromised by medicine he takes for back pain and would therefore not “render him unconscious”.

He also petitioned the court the court that his veins are “severely compromised,” which was likely to cause him “intense pain and burning.”

Nance’s argument for a death by firing squad was basically that compared to a painful and unconstitutional death by lethal injection, he would experience a “swift and virtually painless” death instead.

Related: Judge denies testing of DNA evidence in “ritual murder” of 3 children

Last Thursday, Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the court's opinion that weighed in at a 5 to 4 majority, “A death row inmate may attempt to show that a State’s planned method of execution, either on its face or as applied to him, violates the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on ‘cruel and unusual’ punishment.”

This essentially gives the condemned the right to "challenge the state’s method of execution through a civil rights lawsuit."

Kagan was supported by Justices Stephen Breyer, Brett Kavanaugh, John Roberts, and Sonia Sotomayor

Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote in the following in the dissent for the minority:

“In my view, the consequence of the relief that a prisoner seeks depends on state law as it currently exists. And under existing state law, there is no question that Nance’s challenge necessarily implies the invalidity of his lethal injection sentence: He seeks to prevent the State from executing him in the only way it lawfully can.”