{"id":377,"date":"2018-02-24T10:49:49","date_gmt":"2018-02-24T15:49:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/?p=377"},"modified":"2018-02-24T10:50:22","modified_gmt":"2018-02-24T15:50:22","slug":"840pm-us-supreme-court-denies-stay-over-dissents-of-ginsberg-sotomayor-and-breyer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/2018\/02\/24\/840pm-us-supreme-court-denies-stay-over-dissents-of-ginsberg-sotomayor-and-breyer\/","title":{"rendered":"8:40PM | US SUPREME COURT DENIES STAY OVER DISSENTS OF JUSTICES GINSBURG, SOTOMAYOR, AND BREYER"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The US Supreme Court entered a temporary stay to consider Harcourt\u2019s cert petition and application for a stay, but ultimately denied the stay at approximately 8:40PM, over the dissent of Justices Jane Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, and Breyer.<\/p>\n<p>Ginsburg and Sotomayor protested that \u201cThe District Court and Eleventh Circuit erroneously premised their rejection of Hamm\u2019s claims on novel understandings about how Hamm\u2019s execution would be carried out\u2014understandings gleaned from a stipulation and an affidavit to which Hamm was given no opportunity to respond.\u00a0An adversarial process should have tested the risk of \u201cserious illnessand needless suffering,\u201d <i>Glossip <\/i>v. <i>Gross<\/i>, 576 U. S. ___, ___ (2015) (slip op., at 12) (quoting <i>Baze <\/i>v. <i>Rees<\/i>, 553 U. S.\u00a035, 50 (2008)), presented by the insertion of intravenous catheters into Hamm\u2019s leg or central veins. That method of execution, although it fits within the compass of the State\u2019s execution protocol, has, by all accounts before us,never been tried before in Alabama.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>The Supreme Court&#8217;s ruling is here:<\/p>\n<div class=\"ead-preview\"><div class=\"ead-document\" style=\"position: relative;padding-top: 90%;\"><div class=\"ead-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe src=\"\/\/docs.google.com\/viewer?url=https%3A%2F%2Fblogs.law.columbia.edu%2Fupdate-hamm-v-alabama%2Ffiles%2F2018%2F02%2F17-7855-17A900-Hamm-v.-Dunn-Order.pdf&amp;embedded=true&amp;hl=en\" title=\"Embedded Document\" class=\"ead-iframe\" style=\"width: 100%;height: 100%;border: none;position: absolute;left: 0;top: 0;visibility: hidden;\"><\/iframe><\/div>\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-loading\" style=\"width:100%;height:100%;position:absolute;left:0;top:0;z-index:10;\">\n\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-wrap\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-main\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/loading.svg\" width=\"55\" height=\"55\" alt=\"Loader\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Loading...<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-loading-foot-title\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/EAD-logo.svg\" alt=\"EAD Logo\" width=\"36\" height=\"23\"\/>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>Taking too long?<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"ead-document-btn ead-reload-btn\" role=\"button\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/reload.svg\" alt=\"Reload\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Reload document\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span>|<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/files\/2018\/02\/17-7855-17A900-Hamm-v.-Dunn-Order.pdf\" class=\"ead-document-btn\" target=\"_blank\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-content\/plugins\/embed-any-document\/images\/open.svg\" alt=\"Open\" width=\"12\" height=\"12\"\/> Open in new tab\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/div><p class=\"embed_download\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/files\/2018\/02\/17-7855-17A900-Hamm-v.-Dunn-Order.pdf\" download>Download [51.96 KB] <\/a><\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The US Supreme Court entered a temporary stay to consider Harcourt\u2019s cert petition and application for a stay, but ultimately denied the stay at approximately 8:40PM, over the dissent of Justices Jane Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor, and Breyer. Ginsburg and Sotomayor protested that \u201cThe District Court and Eleventh Circuit erroneously premised their rejection of Hamm\u2019s [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1641,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[56328],"tags":[],"class_list":{"0":"post-377","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","6":"category-rulings","7":"czr-hentry"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/377","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1641"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=377"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/377\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=377"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=377"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.law.columbia.edu\/update-hamm-v-alabama\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=377"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}