This is an archival page. To see updat­ed news, please view the lethal injec­tion news and devel­op­ments feed here.

On March 15, 2019, a Nebraska fed­er­al dis­trict court ruled that the state Department of Correctional Services must dis­close doc­u­ments relat­ing to how it obtained the fen­tanyl it used in the August 2018 exe­cu­tion of Carey Dean Moore. The order was issued in con­nec­tion with efforts by Arkansas death-row pris­on­ers to show that fen­tanyl was avail­able as an alter­na­tive to lethal-injec­tion exe­cu­tions using midazolam. 

On February 19, 2019, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine announced the halt of Ohio exe­cu­tions until a new drug pro­to­col has been cre­at­ed. DeWine’s announce­ment came after he grant­ed a reprieve based on a fed­er­al mag­is­trate judge’s January 14 opin­ion that Ohio’s lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col ​“will almost cer­tain­ly sub­ject [pris­on­ers] to severe pain and needless suffering.”

On December 1, 2018, a Texas fed­er­al dis­trict court denied Joseph Garcia’s request to stay his exe­cu­tion based on new rev­e­la­tions that a com­pound­ing phar­ma­cy sup­ply­ing lethal-injec­tion drugs to the state was on pro­ba­tion as the result of seri­ous health and safety violations.

On November 29, 2018, an Indiana tri­al court ruled that in spite of a new state secre­cy law, the state must release pre-2017 records con­cern­ing the drugs obtained by the state for exe­cu­tions and the com­pa­nies that produced them.

On October 8, 2018, the Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed a tri­al court’s dis­missal of death-row pris­on­ers’ chal­lenge to the state’s lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col. The major­i­ty opin­ion was based on the pris­on­ers’ inabil­i­ty to show that the state had a read­i­ly avail­able alter­na­tive method of execution.

On September 28, 2018, a Nevada District Court issued a per­ma­nent restrain­ing order bar­ring the state from using its sup­ply of mida­zo­lam in exe­cu­tions. The court found that the state had act­ed in ​“bad faith” to obtain the drug through ​“sub­terfuge.”

On August 22, 2018, a Texas fed­er­al judge blocked Arkansas death-row pris­on­ers from obtain­ing infor­ma­tion relat­ing to Texas’s exe­cu­tion pro­to­col, includ­ing the iden­ti­ty of the sup­pli­er of the com­pound­ed pen­to­bar­bi­tal the state cur­rent­ly uses in exe­cu­tions. The pris­on­ers had sought the infor­ma­tion in con­nec­tion with their chal­lenge to Arkansas’s lethal injec­tion pro­to­col, as part of the oblig­a­tion imposed upon them by the U.S. Supreme Court to iden­ti­fy an avail­able alter­na­tive method to car­ry out their executions.

On July 27, 2018, a Mississippi fed­er­al dis­trict court stayed a lethal-injec­tion tri­al until after the U.S. Supreme Court issues a rul­ing in Bucklew v. Precythe, No. 17 – 8151, which involves a Missouri pris­on­er’s pro­pos­al of using nitro­gen gas instead of lethal injection. 

On July 26, 2018, after hold­ing a tri­al, Davidson County (Tennessee) Chancery Court denied death-row pris­on­ers’ chal­lenge to the con­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of the state’s lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col. Although the court found that the state’s use of the seda­tive mida­zo­lam risks the pris­on­er ​“be[ing] able to feel pain from the admin­is­tra­tion of the sec­ond and third drugs,” it denied relief, say­ing the pris­on­ers had not proven that the use of mida­zo­lam cre­at­ed ​“an objec­tive­ly intol­er­a­ble risk of harm” or that a less painful alter­na­tive drug was available. 

On July 16, 2018, a Louisiana fed­er­al dis­trict court extend­ed the stay on Louisiana exe­cu­tions for one year while a chal­lenge to the state’s lethal injec­tion protocols continues.

On July 11, 2018, a Nevada District Court issued a tem­po­rary restrain­ing order against the Nevada Department of Corrections that barred the state from using midaza­lom man­u­fac­tured by the drug com­pa­ny Alvogen in the sched­uled exe­cu­tion of Scott Dozier. The court also stayed Dozier’s exe­cu­tion, which would have been the first in Nevada in more than a decade.

On July 3, 2018, Nevada pub­licly released its most recent lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col, which uses the drugs mida­zo­lam, fen­tanyl, and cisatracuri­um. If Nevada had car­ried out the July 11th sched­uled exe­cu­tion of Scott Dozier, it would have been the first state to use this drug combination. 

On June 18, 2018, a Lancaster (Nebraska) County District Court ruled that the state must dis­close its lethal-injec­tion drug sup­pli­er, sid­ing with the Omaha World Herald, the Lincoln Journal Star, and ACLU of Nebraska, who filed a pub­lic records law­suit to obtain the infor­ma­tion. The Nebraska Attorney General is appeal­ing the decision. 

On June 1, 2018, the Texas Supreme Court denied the State’s request to over­turn the low­er court’s deci­sion requir­ing that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice reveal the source of its lethal-injection drugs. 

On May 30, 2018, Alabama fed­er­al dis­trict court Judge Karon Owen Bowdre ordered the Alabama Department of Corrections to release its lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col and unseal tran­scripts and plead­ings relat­ed to the failed exe­cu­tion of Doyle Hamm. In her May 30, 2018 order, the Chief Judge of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama said ​“how Alabama car­ries out its exe­cu­tions” is ​“a mat­ter of great pub­lic con­cern,” and ruled that the pub­lic’s ​“com­mon law right of access to the sealed records relat­ing to Alabama’s lethal injec­tion pro­to­col” out­weighed argu­ments to keep the records secret. 

On May 10, 2018, with­out address­ing the mer­its of the under­ly­ing chal­lenge to Nevada’s lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col, the Nevada Supreme Court vacat­ed the low­er court’s deci­sion that blocked the state from using a par­a­lyt­ic in com­bi­na­tion with fen­tanyl in Scott Dozier​’s exe­cu­tion after the low­er court found the par­a­lyt­ic could pro­duce air hunger and mask signs of con­scious­ness. Lawyer’s act­ing on behalf of Dozier had filed the law­suit under state post-con­vic­tion pro­ceed­ings, but the Nevada Supreme Court found that was the improp­er vehi­cle to raise such a challenge.

On April 30, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court grant­ed review Bucklew v. Precythe, a case brought by Missouri death-row pris­on­er Russell Bucklew who has a rare con­gen­i­tal dis­ease that caus­es blood-filled tumors in his head, neck, and throat, which can eas­i­ly rup­ture. Bucklew has argued that if the state exe­cutes him via lethal injec­tion, there is a risk that his tumors will erupt and cause unnec­es­sary pain and risk of suf­fo­ca­tion in vio­la­tion of the Eighth Amendment. Read more about the case here.

On March 27, 2018, a California state-court judge lift­ed a 2012 injunc­tion pro­hibit­ing exe­cu­tions because the then-exist­ing statute required the state to com­ply with admin­is­tra­tive pro­ce­dures, which the court found it failed to do. California changed its statute after a November 2016 ref­er­en­dum, and the state is no longer required to com­ply with such procedures.

On March 22, 2018, Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed into law a bill that the leg­is­la­ture had approved the pre­vi­ous day that autho­rizes nitro­gen gas as an alter­na­tive method of exe­cu­tion that will be used if lethal injec­tion is not avail­able because it has been found uncon­sti­tu­tion­al or the drugs are not avail­able. Prisoners also have the option of select­ing nitrogen gas. 

On March 20, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the exe­cu­tion of Missouri pris­on­er Russell Bucklew so that it could con­sid­er his peti­tion for writ of cer­tio­rari that rais­es ques­tions about his abil­i­ty to be exe­cut­ed giv­en his medical condition. 

On March 14, 2018, the Oklahoma Attorney General announced dur­ing a press con­fer­ence that the state planned to devel­op an exe­cu­tion pro­to­col using nitro­gen gas inhala­tion. A pre­lim­i­nary draft of the new pro­to­col is expect­ed in 90 – 120 days. 

On March 6, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in a 2 – 1 deci­sion, reject­ed the Eighth Amendment lethal-injec­tion chal­lenge of Russell Bucklew, who is sched­uled to be exe­cut­ed on March 20. Bucklew has a con­gen­i­tal con­di­tion that ​“caus­es clumps of weak, mal­formed blood ves­sels and tumors to grow in his face, head, neck, and throat” and which impacts his cir­cu­la­to­ry sys­tem. He has argued that lethal injec­tion would result in cru­el and unusu­al pun­ish­ment, and pro­posed lethal gas as an alternative method. 

On February 23, the state of Alabama called off the exe­cu­tion of Doyle Hamm after more than 2 hours. On March 6, Hamm’s attor­ney sub­mit­ted a report from a med­ical doc­tor who exam­ined Hamm three days after the attempt­ed exe­cu­tion. The report showed that Hamm was poked more than 10 times in his feet and in his groin dur­ing which time he was in extreme pain, that he was bleed­ing from his groin, and that his blad­der was like­ly punc­tured dur­ing the pro­ce­dure as he had blood in his urine shortly afterwards. 

On February 13, 2018, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled that the Department of Corrections can make changes regard­ing the drugs to be used in the state’s lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col with­out hav­ing to fol­low the rules under the Administrative Procedures Act, rules which would require — among oth­er things — pub­lic com­ment before the new pro­to­col could take effect. 

On February 13, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit vacat­ed the stay of exe­cu­tion entered by the fed­er­al dis­trict court in Doyle Hamm​’s case. The Court, how­ev­er, ordered an emer­gency exam­i­na­tion of Hamm to help assess whether his med­ical con­di­tion would make Alabama’s pro­posed man­ner of exe­cut­ing him cru­el and unusu­al, and required the dis­trict court to enter fact find­ings on the case by 5pm CST on February 20 — two days before Hamm’s scheduled execution. 

On February 6, 2018, a Federal District Court in Alabama issued a stay of exe­cu­tion for Doyle Hamm to allow fur­ther pro­ceed­ings regard­ing his med­ical con­di­tion (com­pro­mised periph­er­al veins, untreat­ed lym­phoma, and lym­phadenopa­thy) and its impact on the state’s abil­i­ty to car­ry out an exe­cu­tion using intravenous drugs. 

On January 5, 2018, a Federal District Court in Louisiana extend­ed indef­i­nite­ly an exist­ing court order block­ing exe­cu­tions in the state while lethal-injec­tion lit­i­ga­tion is pending. 

On November 2, 2017, the Arkansas Supreme Court held that the state statute gov­ern­ing con­fi­den­tial­i­ty in exe­cu­tions requires pub­lic dis­clo­sure of the man­u­fac­tur­er of the drugs to be used in lethal injection. 

On October 5, 2017, a Federal District Court in Alabama grant­ed Jeffrey Borden a stay of exe­cu­tion, and the state did not appeal the decision. 

On October 4, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court vacat­ed the stay of exe­cu­tion for Jeffrey Borden.

On September 29, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Eleventh Circuit issued an injunc­tion pro­hibit­ing the State from car­ry­ing out the October 5th sched­uled exe­cu­tion of Alabama death-row pris­on­er Jeffrey Borden, while on the same day denied the request for an injunc­tion by Alabama death-row pris­on­er Torrey McNabb, who has an exe­cu­tion day of October 19. The Court not­ed that McNabb had time to seek an injunc­tion first in the dis­trict court, where­as Borden did not. 

On September 8, 2017, after an evi­den­tiary hear­ing held on September 6, a Federal Magistrate Judge in Ohio denied a motion for pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion filed by death-row pris­on­er Gary Otte, who argued that the state’s exe­cu­tion pro­ce­dures cre­at­ed an uncon­sti­tu­tion­al risk of pain and suf­fer­ing. Otte was exe­cut­ed on September 13. 

On September 6, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Eleventh Circuit issued anoth­er rul­ing in favor of sev­er­al oth­er Alabama death-row pris­on­ers whose civ­il-rights law­suit chal­leng­ing the state’s use of mida­zo­lam in a three-drug pro­to­col was dis­missed by the low­er court. Relying in part on the rea­son­ing from its September 1, the same three-judge pan­el sent the case back to the low­er court to con­duct addi­tion­al pro­ceed­ings. Two of the pris­on­ers in this law­suit, Jeffrey Borden and Torrey McNabb, have exe­cu­tions sched­uled in October, and their attor­ney has asked the Alabama Supreme Court to vacate their exe­cu­tion dates in light of the ruling. 

On September 1, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for Eleventh Circuit ruled in favor of Alabama death-row pris­on­ers who brought a civ­il-rights law­suit chal­leng­ing the state’s use of mida­zo­lam in a three-drug pro­to­col. The low­er court had grant­ed relief to the Alabama Department of Corrections, but the Eleventh Circuit reversed that deci­sion with instruc­tions for the tri­al court to con­duct fur­ther fact-find­ing in the case. 

On August 21, 2017, Janssen (a divi­sion of Johnson & Johnson) — the inven­tor of eto­mi­date (a drug that Florida intends to use for the first time in a lethal injec­tion on August 24)—said that it does not ​“con­done the use of [its] med­i­cines in lethal injec­tions for capital punishment.” 

On August 17, 2017, Nevada announced that it would use three new drugs (diazepam, fen­tanyl, and cisatracuri­um) in the upcom­ing sched­uled exe­cu­tion of Scott Dozier.

On July 25, the Supreme Court denied cer­tio­rari for Phillips, Tibbets, and Otte, with Justice Sotomayor (joined by Ginsburg) dis­sent­ing ​“from th[e] Court’s fail­ure to step in when sig­nif­i­cant issues of life and death are present.” 

On July 17, 2017, Ohio death-row pris­on­ers Ronald Phillips, Raymond Tibbets, and Gary Otte asked the Supreme Court to grant cer­tio­rari and review the Sixth Circuit’s en banc deci­sion revers­ing the pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion that was entered by the dis­trict court based on alle­ga­tions regard­ing the uncon­sti­tu­tion­al­i­ty of the lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col. On July 24, 2017, Fifteen Professors of Pharmacology filed an ami­cus brief in sup­port of cer­tio­rari, explain­ing why the drug mida­zo­lam, which Ohio plans to use in its three-drug pro­to­col, is inap­pro­pri­ate for the State’s intended purpose.

On June 28, 2017, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals sit­ting en banc reversed the low­er court’s issuance of a pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion regard­ing Ohio’s pro­posed lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col, for three pris­on­ers with upcom­ing exe­cu­tion dates (Ronald Phillips, Raymond Tibbets, and Gary Otte).

On June 1, 2017, the Court of Appeals of Indiana ruled that the Department of Corrections must com­ply with the state admin­is­tra­tive rule-mak­ing act ​“when chang­ing its exe­cu­tion pro­to­col, and its fail­ure to do so in this case means that the changed pro­to­col is void and without effect.”

On May 30, 2017, the Arizona Department of Corrections removed a three-drug for­mu­la from its lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col. The pro­to­col now allows a one-drug for­mu­la using either pen­to­bar­bi­tal or sodium thiopental. 

On April 15, 2017, a fed­er­al dis­trict court in Arkansas grant­ed a pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion to pris­on­ers sched­uled for exe­cu­tions in the next two weeks, find­ing that they were like­ly to suc­ceed on the mer­its of their Eighth Amendment claim and their denial of access to coun­sel and the courts claim. 

On April 6, 2017, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the low­er court’s issuance of a pre­lim­i­nary injunc­tion regard­ing Ohio’s pro­posed lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col, for three pris­on­ers with upcom­ing exe­cu­tion dates (Ronald Phillips, Raymond Tibbets, and Gary Otte).

Tennessee Supreme Court upheld the state’s lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col on 3/​29/​17, but the state says it does not have any lethal-injection drugs.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit heard oral argu­ment on 3/​7/​17, regard­ing Ohio’s pro­posed lethal-injec­tion pro­to­col, which uses the con­tro­ver­sial drug mida­zo­lam as the first drug.

On February 21, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court denied review in Alabama death-row pris­on­er Thomas Arthur’s lethal-injec­tion chal­lenge, a deci­sion that came with an 18-page dis­sent by Justice Sotomayor (joined by Justice Breyer).

Arizona declared it does not have a sup­ply of lethal injec­tion drugs, nor does it have access to them. The Department of Corrections also announced that it will aban­don the use of mida­zo­lam in exe­cu­tions (BuzzFeed, 6/​24/​16)

The Arkansas Supreme Court upheld the state’s lethal injec­tion pro­to­col in a 4 – 3 deci­sion. It is unclear whether Arkansas will be able to obtain lethal injec­tion drugs, and its only known sup­ply expires June 30, 2016. (AP, 6/​23/​16)

Louisiana will not car­ry out any exe­cu­tions until at least 2018 as a result of ongo­ing lit­i­ga­tion and the state’s inabil­i­ty to obtain lethal injec­tion drugs. (AP, 5/​31/​16)

California has pro­posed a new one-drug lethal injec­tion pro­to­col with four drug options (amo­bar­bi­tal, pen­to­bar­bi­tal, sec­o­bar­bi­tal, or thiopen­tal). The approval process is expect­ed to take at least a year, fol­lowed by pos­si­ble legal chal­lenges. (LA Times, 11/​6/​15)

Ohio has post­poned all exe­cu­tions until at least 2017 because the state has been unable to obtain lethal injec­tion drugs (Reuters, 10/​19/​15)

An Arkansas judge stayed all 8 sched­uled exe­cu­tions in the state in light of the pend­ing chal­lenge to the exe­cu­tion process. (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 10/​9/​15)

A Montana judge ruled that the state’s pro­posed lethal injec­tion pro­to­col vio­lates state law. As a result of the rul­ing, exe­cu­tions in Montana will remain on hold indef­i­nite­ly. (Reuters, 10/​6/​15)

Oklahoma has delayed exe­cu­tions indef­i­nite­ly for a review of lethal injec­tion pro­to­cols, after the state obtained the wrong third drug for its three-drug pro­to­col. (Washington Post, 10/​2/​15) State records revealed that the wrong final drug (potas­si­um acetate, instead of the potas­si­um chlo­ride called for in the pro­to­col) had been used in the January 2015 exe­cu­tion of Charles Warner. (The Oklahoman, 10/​8/​15)

Arkansas has pur­chased drugs, report­ed­ly mida­zo­lam, in an effort to resume exe­cu­tions. Arkansas has a secre­cy law in place, shield­ing the iden­ti­ties of lethal injec­tion drug sup­pli­ers. (Reuters, 8/​12/​15)

North Carolina Governor Pat McCrory signed a bill that removes the require­ment that a physi­cian be present at exe­cu­tions, and pro­vides secre­cy for those who make, sup­ply, or admin­is­ter lethal injec­tion drugs. (News & Observer, 8/​6/​15)

On July 7, 2015, a Tennessee court began review­ing the state’s lethal injec­tion pro­to­col. (Tennessean, 7/​5/​15).

On June 29, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court refused (5 – 4) to block Oklahoma​’s use of mida­zo­lam in exe­cu­tions. See Glossip v. Gross.

Oklahoma’s gov­er­nor signed leg­is­la­tion on April 17, 2015, allow­ing use of nitro­gen gas for exe­cu­tions if lethal injec­tion drugs can­not be obtained or if that method is struck down by the courts. Two oth­er states have recent­ly passed sim­i­lar leg­is­la­tion. (Tenn.-electrocution; Utah-fir­ing squad). (Wash. Post, 4/​17/​15).

Utah’s gov­er­nor signed a bill on March 23, 2015 allow­ing the use of fir­ing squads in exe­cu­tions if lethal injec­tion drugs can­not be obtained. (New York Times, 3/​23/​15)

Georgia announced that all exe­cu­tions will be post­poned until the drug used in exe­cu­tions could be ana­lyzed. The Department of Corrections made the deci­sion after post­pon­ing the exe­cu­tion of Kelly Gissendaner, which had been sched­uled for March 2, due to the drug appear­ing cloudy. (Christian Science Monitor, 3/​3/​15)

Akorn Pharmaceuticals, a man­u­fac­tur­er of mida­zo­lam, said it ​“strong­ly oppos­es” the use of its prod­ucts in exe­cu­tions and will take steps to block the sale of its drugs for lethal injec­tion. (Anniston Star, 2/​19/​15) The com­pa­ny request­ed that Alabama return any Akorn-made drugs, stat­ing in a let­ter to the Department of Corrections, ​“If your pris­ons have pur­chased Akorn prod­ucts direct­ly or indi­rect­ly for use in cap­i­tal pun­ish­ment we ask that you imme­di­ate­ly return our prod­ucts for a full refund.” (Anniston Star, 3/​18/​15)