In a very strange twist of legal procedures, a stay of Charles Warner’s Oklahoma execution was not granted by the Supreme Court last week; however, his case has been accepted on certiorari to determine whether the lethal injection procedures used in Oklahoma constitute “cruel and unusual punishment.”
According to Supreme Court procedures, a stay of execution requires five votes, however a grant of certiorari only requires four votes. So, while the dissent in the denial of Mr. Warner’s petition for a stay of execution states:
“To grant a stay, we must find a reasonable probability that the Court would vote to grant certiorari, a significant possibility of reversal, and a likelihood of irreparable injury to the applicant in the absence of a stay. See Barefoot v. Estelle, 463 U. S. 880, 895 (1983). Petitioners’ application met these criteria.”
What’s sad is, the Court very well could rule that the way that the death penalty is administered in Oklahoma is unconstitutional, in which case Mr. Warner would still be alive today. While a punishment deserves a just penalty, the administration of justice in an unconstitutional way is not the administration of justice at all.
More on this on the Dorer Daily, Tweet me at @DavidTDorer, listen to the David Dorer Show live every Friday, and download it on iTunes and on Stitcher.