Editorial: Reviewing lethal injection

Wednesday, Oct. 17, 2007 | 7:25 a.m.

Nevada granted condemned murderer William Patrick Castillo a reprieve Monday, joining other states that have delayed executions by lethal injection, a method that is to be examined by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Critics of lethal injection, many of whom also oppose the death penalty, say the three-chemical cocktail immobilizes inmates but still allows them to feel pain until the moment of death. For that reason, they contend, lethal injection violates the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

The Supreme Court case was initiated in Kentucky and involves the cases of two murderers who have challenged lethal injection's constitutionality. As a result of the high court accepting the case, more than a dozen state courts and governors have delayed executions, The Washington Post reports. Execution by lethal injection is used in 37 states.

Nevada's Supreme Court has postponed all lethal injections for 60 days. Castillo had waived his appeals and asked to die, but the execution was stopped after a petition filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada on behalf of execution witnesses. The ACLU says the paralysis caused by the drugs falsely presents the execution as painless.

We praise the Nevada Supreme Court for staying the state's executions. This will allow the court to be briefed by lawyers, after which the court might decide to hear oral arguments.

But this is only a step in the right direction. After reviewing the case, we hope Nevada's justices will postpone all executions until the U.S. Supreme Court renders its decision in the Kentucky case. Nevada has nothing to lose in waiting for the court's decision, and it has plenty to gain by opting to be a state in which even a condemned inmate's rights under the U.S. Constitution are observed.