October Term 2014 · Docket 14-7955
Does Oklahoma's three-drug execution protocol violate the Eighth Amendment?
the sides that brought the case claim the state's execution method causes severe pain. The state argues the protocol is constitutional.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Ms. Konrad argued the protocol causes intense pain and suffering.
She stated the second and third drugs cause suffocation.
She claimed the method is constitutional only if pain is absent.
Chief Justice Roberts questioned the burden of showing factual errors.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 40-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 40-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 26-32 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 26-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-12 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 16-22 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 16-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-36 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 10-18 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 10-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 20-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 32-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 12-18 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 12-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-26 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-4 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 16-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 16-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 24-32 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 24-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 38-46 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 38-46
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests whether a specific drug combination for execution is cruel and unusual. The dispute centers on the legal standard for reviewing lower court findings.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 29, 2015.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 32-34
What each side wants
the sides that brought the case want the Court to strike down the three-drug execution protocol.
The state wants the Court to uphold the current execution method.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
What each side says
the sides that brought the case argue the protocol causes intense pain and suffocation.
The state argues the protocol is constitutional if pain is minimized.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
What the justices asked
Chief Justice Roberts asked about the burden of proof for factual findings.
Justice Scalia asked whether the core issue is a question of law or fact.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 40-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 40-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 26-32 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 26-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-12 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 16-22 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 16-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-36 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 10-18 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 10-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 20-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 32-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 12-18 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 12-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-26 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-4 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 16-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 16-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 24-32 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 24-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 38-46 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 38-46
Why it matters
The outcome defines the legal standard for challenging execution methods. It determines how courts review scientific evidence in death penalty cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 40-50 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 40-50
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 8-16 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 8-16
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 26-32 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 26-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 52-12 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 52-12
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 6-6 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 6-6
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 16-22 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 16-22
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 26-36 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 26-36
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 10-18 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 10-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 58, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 58, lines 20-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 59, lines 32-34 — Transcript, file page 59, lines 32-34
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 12-18 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 12-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 22-26 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 22-26
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 46-4 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 46-4
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 16-20 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 16-20
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 24-32 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 24-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 38-46 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 38-46
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 25, lines 38-38 — Transcript, file page 25, lines 38-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 18-38 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 18-38
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 57, lines 44-8 — Transcript, file page 57, lines 44-8
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.