Policy

United States Supreme Court

In the 1970s, the U.S. Supreme Court found the application of the death penalty unconstitutional, but allowed executions to resume under revised laws four years later. Today, the Court often faces questions on the constitutionality of particular aspects of the death-penalty system.

Overview

The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of whether the con­sti­tu­tion is being fol­lowed. States may be more pro­tec­tive of indi­vid­ual rights than required under the fed­er­al con­sti­tu­tion, but they can­not be less pro­tec­tive. In par­tic­u­lar, the Supreme Court is respon­si­ble for ensur­ing that state use of the death penal­ty adheres to our fun­da­men­tal rights. Court rul­ings can involve the meth­ods of exe­cu­tion used, the com­pe­ten­cy of defense coun­sel, the selec­tion of juries, the behav­ior of the pros­e­cu­tion, and many oth­er mat­ters pro­tect­ed by the right to due process.

In the ear­li­er his­to­ry of the coun­try, the Supreme Court left much of the prac­tice of the death penal­ty and oth­er pun­ish­ments to the states’ dis­cre­tion, rarely rul­ing on whether any prac­tice should be con­sid­ered cru­el and unusu­al. In recent decades, the Court has reg­u­lar­ly con­sid­ered mul­ti­ple cap­i­tal cas­es each term. Some of these cas­es arise from appeals of state rul­ings involv­ing the U.S. con­sti­tu­tion, oth­ers are result of fed­er­al deci­sions on both state and fed­er­al death penalty matters.

At Issue

The key ques­tion for the Supreme Court is whether the death penal­ty itself con­tin­ues to be con­sti­tu­tion­al in light of its rare use and its rejec­tion by large seg­ments of soci­ety. Recent rev­e­la­tions about the risks of exe­cut­ing inno­cent defen­dants, racial bias in its appli­ca­tion, and the lengthy time inmates spend on death row, has led soci­ety to rethink its sup­port of the death penal­ty. Some Justices have called for a com­pre­hen­sive review of the prac­tice. The make-up of the Court is like­ly to deter­mine when such a case might be con­sid­ered and how the Court will rule.

What DPIC Offers

DPIC has sum­maries of the impor­tant death penal­ty cas­es decid­ed by the Supreme Court in the mod­ern era. The opin­ions of indi­vid­ual Justices on the prac­tice of the death penal­ty in the U.S. are high­light­ed. Cases that the Court has decid­ed to hear but have not yet been argued are pre­viewed on the website.

News & Developments


News

Oct 27, 2025

Alabama Execution Witnesses Report Violent Thrashing” of Prisoner and More Than 225 Agonized Breaths” in Nitrogen Gas Execution

On October 23, 2025, Alabama exe­cut­ed Anthony Boyd, despite his unwa­ver­ing claim of inno­cence and a fiery dis­sent authored by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, renew­ing the seri­ous con­cerns that have been con­sis­tent­ly raised about the state’s use of nitro­gen gas. Justice Sotomayor, joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson, dis­sent­ed from the Court’s October 23, 2025, denial of a stay of exe­cu­tion, writ­ing that Alabama’s use of nitro­gen gas​“vio­lates the Constitution…

Read More

News

Aug 05, 2025

Unless Governor Lee Intervenes, Tennessee Will Execute Byron Black, A Man with Intellectual Disability, and Risk a Torturous Execution Due to His Heart Defibrillator

- Update August 5, 2024: All (mul­ti­ple) media wit­ness­es who observed the exe­cu­tion report that Mr. Black was observed repeat­ed­ly lift­ing his head,​“sigh­ing” and​“groan­ing” dur­ing his exe­cu­tion, at one point say­ing​“It’s hurt­ing so bad.” He demon­strat­ed​“clear, audi­ble signs of dis­tress” for sev­er­al min­utes.​“It was unan­i­mous among all of us that he was in dis­tress.” He was declared dead at 10:43 CT
On July 31, 2025, the Tennessee Supreme Court…

Read More

News

Jun 27, 2025

U.S. Supreme Court Rules in Favor of Texas Death Row Prisoner Seeking DNA Testing

On June 26, 2025, the United States Supreme Court issued a rare 63 rul­ing in favor of a Texas death row pris­on­er, Ruben Gutierrez, hold­ing that he may pro­ceed with his law­suit chal­leng­ing Texas’s post-con­vic­­tion DNA statute on con­sti­tu­tion­al grounds. Mr. Gutierrez was con­vict­ed and sen­tenced to death in 1999 for the mur­der and rob­bery of an 85-year-old woman but has long main­tained he did not know his code­fen­dants would kill the vic­tim. According to the decision,…

Read More

News

Jun 03, 2025

Scott Panetti, Prisoner in Landmark Competency Case, Dies on Texas Death Row of Natural Causes

Scott Panetti died on Texas’ death row at the end of May 2025 after 30 years in prison. He became well-known for the role his case played in clar­i­fy­ing the legal stan­dard for deter­min­ing when defen­dants are com­pe­tent to face exe­cu­tion — prece­dent that con­tin­ues to shape court deci­sions nation­wide. Mr. Panetti’s severe men­tal ill­ness man­i­fest­ed in his late teens, lead­ing to more than a dozen psy­chi­atric hos­pi­tal­iza­tions through the 1980s and ear­ly 1990s. His…

Read More

News

Apr 15, 2025

United States Supreme Court Denies Review for Death-Sentenced Missouri Man Whose Jury Foreman Was Removed for Bias

On March 31, the Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal of Lance Shockley of Missouri, the 36th death-sen­­tenced per­son to be denied cer­tio­rari by the Court this year. At tri­al, Mr. Shockley’s jury fore­man was removed before the sen­tenc­ing phase based on evi­dence of seri­ous bias — but Mr. Shockley’s attor­ney declined the oppor­tu­ni­ty to ques­tion the fore­man or oth­er jurors about the mis­con­duct, and his con­vic­tion, which the fore­man par­tic­i­pat­ed in, was allowed to…

Read More