October Term 2018 · Docket 17-8151
Does a new medical condition invalidate a state's execution method?
A condemned man argues his tracheostomy tube makes the state's drug lethal. The state says the method remains 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
the side that brought the case's lawyer argued the alternative method requirement applies. He focused on the specific risks posed by the tracheostomy tube.
The state's lawyer defended the single-drug protocol. He stated Missouri has never taken a position on the specific medical question.
Justice Roberts asked about the timing of brain activity cessation. He noted major surgery does not wait for zero electrical activity.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 20-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 20-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 26-30 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 26-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-32 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-29 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 29-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 8-14 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 8-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-30 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 30-32 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 30-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 25-8 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 25-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-18 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 26-8 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 26-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 23-24 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 23-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 25-26 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 25-26
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The case tests whether a prisoner's changed medical status blocks a state's execution protocol. the side that brought the case claims his condition creates a new risk of pain. The state asserts its method stays lawful and effective.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on November 6, 2018.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 8-14 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 8-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 23-24 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 23-24
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to block the execution. He argues his tracheostomy tube creates a substantial risk of severe pain.
The state wants the Court to allow the execution. It argues its single-drug method remains the most humane option available.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
What each side says
the side that brought the case contends his medical condition changes the legal analysis. He says the tracheostomy tube creates a new, substantial risk of suffering.
The state contends its protocol remains constitutional. It argues the method has worked safely twenty times without significant incidents.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
What the justices asked
Justice Sotomayor asked about the prisoner's current medical condition. She inquired if the tracheostomy tube remains in his throat.
Justice Sotomayor questioned whether the Court might issue an advisory opinion. She noted the case changes if the tube stays or goes.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 20-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 20-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 26-30 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 26-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-32 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-29 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 29-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-30 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 30-32 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 30-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 25-8 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 25-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-18 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 26-8 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 26-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 23-24 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 23-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 25-26 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 25-26
Why it matters
This case defines how courts handle new medical facts in death penalty cases. It sets the standard for when a state must change its execution method. The outcome shapes future challenges to lethal injection protocols.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
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 10, lines 20-23 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 20-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 26-30 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 26-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 11, lines 31-32 — Transcript, file page 11, lines 31-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 13, lines 28-29 — Transcript, file page 13, lines 28-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 29-9 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 29-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 8-14 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 8-14
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 35-8 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 35-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 29-30 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 29-30
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 30-32 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 30-32
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 69, lines 25-8 — Transcript, file page 69, lines 25-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-18 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-18
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 35-23 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 35-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 70, lines 26-8 — Transcript, file page 70, lines 26-8
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 71, lines 23-24 — Transcript, file page 71, lines 23-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 25-26 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 25-26
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 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 33, lines 34-11 — Transcript, file page 33, lines 34-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 15-28 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 15-28
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 66, lines 34-1 — Transcript, file page 66, lines 34-1
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 67, lines 20-24 — Transcript, file page 67, lines 20-24
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.