South Carolina’s Top Court Approves Death by Firing Squad as a Legal Form of Execution
In a contentious legal ruling, South Carolina’s highest court upholds death by firing squad
In a pivotal ruling, The South Carolina Supreme Court has decreed that death by electrocution, firing squad or lethal injection are all legally acceptable forms of execution in the state. This is based on the claim that since inmates are allowed to select the method they deem least tormenting, none of the options could be classified as cruel or unusual punishment.
This decision has emerged in response to the passage of a controversial bill in 2021. This bill resulted in the legalization of death by electric chair or firing squad, augmenting the available options for those sentenced to the death penalty.
A controversial law mandating electrocution
According to this 2021 law, death by electrocution was instituted as the default method of execution. The enactment was proposed and pushed through due to the state’s inability to acquire pharmaceuticals for lethal injection, which continues to be the prevalent execution procedure across other states.
Following this legislative action, inmates challenged saying that death by electrocutions and firing squads are capable of causing intense agony. They argued that these methods were intense, bodily punishments that were disallowed under the South Carolina Constitution.
A majority rule in favor
The case was assessed by South Carolina’s top court and dealt with by its five justices, the majority of whom lean conservative. Moreover, these justices rejected the inmates’ pleas, ruling in favor of the three newly enforced methods of execution.
This recent ruling is anticipated to allow for the recommencement of executions, with all three newly endorsed methods obtainable.
The last execution in the state occurred in 2011 and 32 individuals currently await on South Carolina’s death row.
Justice John Cannon Few’s Statement on the ruling
Echoing the court’s decision, Associate Justice John Cannon Few elaborated in his majority opinion that “The methods cannot be considered cruel as the condemned prisoner could elect the state to utilize the method he and his attorneys believe will inflict the least amount of pain.”
He went further to elaborate on the legislation put in place by the state’s legislature that was dominated by Republicans, saying that it “was not an effort to inflict pain, but rather a sincere effort to make the death penalty less inhumane while enabling the state to carry out its laws.”
Despite the assurance of the ruling, the decision continues to generate intense debates within legal circles and the public at large about the nature of punishment and the limits of state power.
