Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/14pdf/14-7955_aplc.pdf
Page Number: 127

Cite as:  576 U. S. ____ (2015) 

31 

SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting 

Unnatural American History 39 (1999) (quoting Editorial, 
New  York  Herald,  Aug.  10,  1884);  see  generally  Banner, 
supra, at 169–207.  A return to the firing squad—and the 
blood and physical violence that comes with it—is a step in
the  opposite  direction.    And  some  might  argue  that  the
visible brutality of such a death could conceivably give rise 
to its own Eighth Amendment concerns.  See Campbell v. 
Wood,  511  U. S.  1119,  1121–1123  (1994)  (Blackmun,  J., 
dissenting from denial of stay of execution and certiorari); 
Glass v. Louisiana, 471 U. S. 1080, 1085 (1985) (Brennan, 
J.,  dissenting  from  denial  of  certiorari).    At  least  from  a 
condemned inmate’s perspective, however, such visible yet
relatively painless violence may be vastly preferable to an
excruciatingly  painful  death  hidden  behind  a  veneer  of 
medication.  The States may well be reluctant to pull back 
the  curtain  for  fear  of  how  the  rest  of  us  might  react  to
what  we  see.    But  we  deserve  to  know  the  price  of  our 
collective comfort before we blindly allow a State to make 
condemned inmates pay it in our names. 

* 

* 

* 
“By  protecting  even  those  convicted  of  heinous  crimes,
the  Eighth  Amendment  reaffirms  the  duty  of  the  govern­
ment to respect the dignity of all persons.”  Roper v. Sim-
mons,  543  U. S.  551,  560  (2005).    Today,  however,  the 
Court absolves the State of Oklahoma of this duty.  It does 
so  by  misconstruing  and  ignoring  the  record  evidence
regarding the constitutional insufficiency of midazolam as 
a sedative in a three-drug lethal injection cocktail, and by
imposing  a  wholly  unprecedented  obligation  on  the  con­
demned  inmate  to  identify  an  available  means  for  his  or
her own execution.  The contortions necessary to save this
particular lethal injection protocol are not worth the price.
I dissent.