Delhi HC: Bipolar Disorder Alone Does Not Qualify as Medical Disability Without Benchmark Criteria || Kerala HC: Excommunicating Knanaya Catholics For Marrying Outside the Community is Unconstitutional || Kerala HC: Temporary Use of Religious Land For Public Infrastructure is Not a ‘Transfer’ under Law || P&H HC: Habeas Plea in Child Custody Case Not Maintainable if Child is With Natural Guardian and Safe || Delhi HC: Illegal Termination Does Not Automatically Entitle Employee to Reinstatement or Back Wages || Gujarat High Court: Forcing Toddler to Attend Court 6 Hours Weekly For Grandfather Visits is Unjust || Supreme Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Plea, Directs Timely Resolution of Disciplinary Proceedings || Supreme Court Rejects NHAI Review on Solatium Retrospectivity, Bars Reopening Settled Claims || SC: Excise Duty Exemptions Based on Intended Use Must be Construed Liberally For Assessee || Supreme Court: DSC Personnel Eligible For Second Pension; Allows Condonation of Shortfall

Glossip et al. v. Gross et al - (29 Jun 2015)

Use of midazolam does not violate Eighth Amendment of Constitution

Criminal

Hearing a petition against the use of midazolam by the State of Oklahoma in carrying out the death penalty, the United States Supreme Court held that the Petitioners had failed to establish that its use would create a demonstrated risk of severe pain. It added, Oklahoma did not have access to alternatives, and the Petitioners themselves had failed to suggest a more appropriate substitute. Midazolam is the first of three drugs used in carrying out executions by lethal injection. It came to be used by State authorities after previous drugs, like sodium thiopental, used to induce a state of unconsciousness in the inmate were prevented from being used in executions.

Tags : DEATH ROW EXECUTION MIDAZOLAM

Share :