2
The plaintiffs in this case are all federal prisoners sentenced to death for murdering children and have exhausted all avenues for direct and collateral review. The Federal Government planned to use one drug, pentobarbital sodium, for the scheduled executions taking place this afternoon, this week and next month, as it is generally accepted to render a person insensate and without causing pain. However, shortly before the first execution took place, the District Court issued a preliminary injunction due to the plaintiffs' Eight Amendment claims of cruel and
unusual punishment. Vacating this injunction is recommended as the plaintiffs have not demonstrated enough evidence to suggest they are likely to succeed on the merits of their Eight Amendment claim.
The District Court issued an injunction to halt all four executions due to the Eighth Amendment,
which protects against cruel and unusual punishment. However, vacating the injunction is likely appropriate since the plaintiffs have not proved that their claim under the Eighth Amendment is
likely to be successful. The District Court and the Court of Appeals both evaluated respondents' claims about their Eighth Amendment rights and decided to stay their executions in order to consider the claims more thoroughly. The Court of Appeals declined the Government's motion to stay, stating that the claims raised "novel and difficult constitutional questions" that need further examination. This Court granted the Government's application to vacate the stay, allowing death-sentenced inmates to be executed without consideration of whether their executions would be unconstitutionally cruel and unusual. This decision was made only hours after the initial stay was granted.
