A pend­ing fed­er­al law­suit in Missouri asserts that a state law shroud­ing the mak­ers of lethal injec­tion drugs in secre­cy is a form of pri­or cen­sor­ship and an inter­fer­ence with the pulic’s right to free­dom of speech and free­dom of the press under the First Amendment. U.S. District Court Judge Beth Phillips, who has already expressed con­cern about with­hold­ing this infor­ma­tion from a death row defen­dant fac­ing exe­cu­tion, is expect­ed to rule soon on this broad­er prob­lem. The Georgia Supreme Court is also weigh­ing the con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of a sim­i­lar ban on releas­ing infor­ma­tion in that state. States do not want to reveal the sources of their drugs because it might embar­rass the phar­ma­cists who are prepar­ing the chem­i­cals. Under Missouri’s law, any­one who pub­lish­es infor­ma­tion about the phar­ma­cy mak­ing the drug is liable to be sued. In 2006, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch revealed that the doc­tor who pre­pared the drugs for Missouri’s exe­cu­tions had been pub­licly dis­ci­plined by the state med­ical board, prompt­ing the leg­is­la­ture to pass the secre­cy law. The paper also iden­ti­fied a nurse on the exe­cu­tion team who was on pro­ba­tion for stalk­ing. The edi­tor of the Post-Dispatch lat­er wrote, ​“We believe the law is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al, and we also believe it sti­fles pub­lic dis­cus­sion and hin­ders governmental accountability.”

State secre­cy regard­ing lethal injec­tions is being chal­lenged in oth­er states, includ­ing Colorado and Louisiana.

(J. Kohler, ​“Ruling could clar­i­fy Missouri’s exe­cu­tion­er secre­cy law,” St. Louis Today, February 6, 2014). See Lethal Injection and Recent Legislation.

Citation Guide