Opinion ID: 3065871
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: balance of interests under winter and alliance

Text: FOR THEWILD ROCKIES [12] We recognize that Towery and Moormann demon- strate irreparable harm, as does every § 1983 plaintiff in an injunction appeal involving an upcoming execution. We also recognize that the State ordinarily has “a strong interest in enforcing its judgments without undue interference from federal courts,” although, as indicated at the outset, that interest can be and has been undermined to a degree by Arizona’s pattern of behavior in the recent execution litigation. Finally, we also recognize that the victims of crime have an important interest in “timely enforcement of a sentence.” Hill, 547 U.S. at 584-85. Nonetheless, in light of our conclusion that Towery TOWERY v. BREWER 2521 and Moormann do not raise serious questions going to the merits of their Eighth and Fourteenth Amendment claims with regard to their executions as they will actually be carried out, we conclude that Towery and Moormann do not meet the standards under Winter and Alliance for the Wild Rockies for issuance of a preliminary injunction. AFFIRMED; the request for stay of execution is DENIED.