SC: Fixed Shares Paid to Association of Persons Members are Taxable as Income, Regardless of Profit || Supreme Court: Wife Pursuing Her Career Cannot be Deemed Cruelty For Hurting Her Husband || Supreme Court: Appeals Must Include Certified Copies of Orders, as E-Filing Alone is Insufficient || Supreme Court: Children Have a Fundamental Right to Receive Education in Their Mother Tongue || Delhi High Court: Employer’s Delhi Head Office Alone Does Not Give Delhi Labour Courts Jurisdiction || Delhi High Court: Labour Courts Cannot Decide Disputed TA/DA Claims under Section 33C(2) of ID Act || J&K&L HC: Rejection of a Representation Does Not Create Fresh Cause of Action in Service Matters || J&K&L HC: Suspension Period Can be Excluded Only For Back Wages and Not For Seniority or Promotion || Supreme Court: SC/ST Act Does Not Apply to Alleged Casteist Abuse Inside a Private House || Supreme Court: Frictionless Relationship Between the Bar and the Bench Strengthens Justice Delivery

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 :