Judges: Sonia Sotomayor
Filed: May 13, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: Cite as: 587 U. S. _ (2019) 1 SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ABU-ALI ABDUR’RAHMAN, ET AL. v. TONY PARKER, COMMISSIONER, TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE, MIDDLE DIVISION No. 18–8332. Decided May 13, 2019 The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, dissenting from denial of certiorari. I have already explained my opposition to the “perverse requirement that inmates
Summary: Cite as: 587 U. S. _ (2019) 1 SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES ABU-ALI ABDUR’RAHMAN, ET AL. v. TONY PARKER, COMMISSIONER, TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE, MIDDLE DIVISION No. 18–8332. Decided May 13, 2019 The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, dissenting from denial of certiorari. I have already explained my opposition to the “perverse requirement that inmates ..
More
Cite as: 587 U. S. ____ (2019) 1
SOTOMAYOR, J., dissenting
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
ABU-ALI ABDUR’RAHMAN, ET AL. v. TONY PARKER,
COMMISSIONER, TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT
OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL.
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME
COURT OF TENNESSEE, MIDDLE DIVISION
No. 18–8332. Decided May 13, 2019
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, dissenting from denial of certiorari.
I have already explained my opposition to the “perverse
requirement that inmates offer alternative methods for
their own executions.” McGehee v. Hutchinson, 581 U. S.
___, ___ (2017) (opinion dissenting from denial of applica-
tion for stay and denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 2); see
generally Glossip v. Gross, 576 U. S. ___, ___–___ (2015)
(slip op., at 13–15). I have likewise addressed the added
perversity of the secrecy laws that Tennessee imposes on
death-row prisoners seeking to meet this requirement.
See Zagorski v. Parker, 586 U. S. ___, ___–___ (2018)
(opinion dissenting from denial of application for stay and
denial of certiorari) (slip op., at 4–5) (discussing prisoners’
inability to depose those with firsthand knowledge of the
State’s efforts to procure an alternative drug or to learn
which sellers the State had contacted).
The Court has recently reaffirmed (and extended) the
alternative-method requirement. See Bucklew v. Precythe,
587 U. S. ___, ___–___ (2019) (slip op., at 14–20). And
today, the Court again ignores the further injustice of
state secrecy laws denying death-row prisoners access to
potentially crucial information for meeting that require-
ment. Because I continue to believe that the alternative-
method requirement is fundamentally wrong—and par-
ticularly so when compounded by secrecy laws like
Tennessee’s—I dissent.