"Oklahoma Told It Can’t Shield Suppliers of Execution Drugs," is by Erik Eckholm for the New York Times.
An Oklahoma judge ruled on Wednesday that the state could not keep secret the identities of the suppliers of lethal-injection drugs, raising doubts about the executions of two prisoners next month and fueling a growing legal battle in several states over secrecy in methods of execution.
The state argued that a supplier-secrecy law, passed in 2011, was necessary because of a shortage of execution drugs and threats against companies that supply them. But lawyers for the two prisoners, Clayton Lockett and Charles Warner, countered that without knowing the source of the drugs, courts could not determine whether the execution protocol satisfied the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment, and prisoners were denied the right to know, and potentially question, how they would be put to death.
Judge Patricia Parrish, of the Oklahoma County District Court, declared the secrecy statute to be an unconstitutional violation of due process in an oral decision from the bench.
The updated AP report is, "Oklahoma Judge Strikes Execution Law Over Privacy," by Bailey Elise McBride, via ABC News.
"Judge Parrish's decision is a major outcome that should have a reverberating impact on other states that are facing similar kinds of transparency issues," said Deborah W. Denno, a professor of law at Fordham University.
And:
Jen Moreno, a staff attorney at U.C. Berkeley School of Law's Death Penalty Clinic, said Parrish's decision "shows there is a growing concern by courts that states are keeping information secret."
"Ultimately, I think her decision is obviously a good step toward bringing transparency and accountability to what's happening in Oklahoma," she said. "I think turning to the secrecy and turning to untested or risky compounded drugs and risky procedures is a trend we've seen in a lot of states and a push to keep that information secret."
The supply of drugs used in lethal injections has dried up in recent years as European manufacturers object to their use in executions and U.S. companies fear protests or boycotts.
"Oklahoma law allowing execution drug secrecy ruled unconstitutional," by Katie Fretland, reporting in Oklahoma City for the Guardian.
An Oklahoma judge ruled Wednesday that a state law that makes the source of execution drugs a secret is unconstitutional.
Oklahoma county district court judge Patricia Parrish said the law violates death row inmates' right to access to the courts in order to argue against their own executions. The statute denies even the judge information about execution drugs, she said.
"I do not think this is even a close call," Parrish said.
Oklahoma assistant attorney general John Hadden said the state will appeal Parrish's decision to the Oklahoma supreme court.
And:
The 2011 law the judge found to be unconstitutional states: “The identity of all persons who participate in or administer the execution process and persons who supply the drugs, medical supplies or medical equipment for the execution shall be confidential and shall not be subject to discovery in any civil or criminal proceedings."
"Oklahoma judge finds aspect of state execution law unconstitutional," by Graham Lee Brewer for teh Oklahoman.
Moments after the ruling, lawyers for the two inmates acknowledged an appeal to the state Supreme Court by the state was likely but said they were happy with Parrish’s decision.
“This case was all about transparency, having access to information,” said Susanna Gattoni, one of their attorneys. “And, so we’re very, very pleased that the district court ruled that people do have the right to know what the government’s doing. That’s essentially what she said today. They have to give us the information, and now they will.”
It is unclear who exactly the state must reveal its lethal drug source to or what time frame it has to do so.
Lockett and Warner’s executions are scheduled for April 22 and 29, respectively, said state Corrections Department spokesman Jerry Massie. Massie declined to comment further on any aspect of the executions, including whether or not the state has the drugs necessary to carry them out.
“We will confer with the attorney general’s office once we have received the written order to determine our legal course of action,” Massie said.
"Judge strikes down Oklahoma execution law," by Michael Muskal for the Los Angeles Times.
“The secrecy statute is unconstitutional because it denies both the inmate and the court access to the information,” Chelsea Adkins, bailiff for Parrish, told the Los Angeles Times, describing the jurist’s ruling on the case. The ruling will likely be appealed.
Even though the ruling was made by a state judge, it could have an effect beyond Oklahoma’s borders, Richard Dieter, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, a Washington-based nonprofit group that tracks death penalty issues, told The Times.
“A ruling like this can set a precedent on issues like this.”
Parrish issued her ruling in response to a request from inmates Clayton Lockett and Charles Warner, who are scheduled to be executed on April 22 and April 29, respectively. Both have requests to stay their executions pending in other courts.
Additional coverage includes:
"Oklahoma Judge Says Execution Drug Secrecy Is Unconstitutional," by Tracy Connor for NBC News.
"Okla. judge rules execution law unconstitutional," by Doug Stanglin at USA TODAY.
"Oklahoma Judge Says State Can’t Keep Execution Drugs Secret," by Josh Sanburn for Time.
ABA Journal posts, "Judge strikes Oklahoma lethal injection law because source of drugs is secret," by Martha Neil.
"Judge Blocks Oklahoma From Using Secret, Unverified Drug In Executions," by Nicole Flatow at Think Progress.
Earlier coverage of the Oklahoma court ruling begins at the link.
Comments