致命注射的命运:范式的分解及其后果

IF 0.2 Q4 LAW
Austin D. Sarat, Mattea Denney, Nicolas Graber-Mitchell, Greene Ko, Rose Mroczka, Lauren Pelosi
{"title":"致命注射的命运:范式的分解及其后果","authors":"Austin D. Sarat, Mattea Denney, Nicolas Graber-Mitchell, Greene Ko, Rose Mroczka, Lauren Pelosi","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.3829078","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines the use of lethal injection from 2010–2020. That period marks the “decomposition” of the standard three-drug protocol and the proliferating use of new drugs or drug combinations in American executions. That development is associated with an increase in the number and type of mishaps encountered during lethal injections. This article describes and analyzes those mishaps and the ways death penalty jurisdictions responded, and adapted, to them. It suggests that the recent history of lethal injection echoes the longer history of the death penalty. When states encountered problems with their previous methods of execution, they first attempted to address these problems by tinkering with their existing methods. When tinkering failed, they adopted allegedly more humane execution methods. When they ran into difficulty with the new methods, state actors scrambled to hide the death penalty from public view. New drugs and drug combinations may have allowed the machinery of death to keep running. New procedures may have given the lethal injection process a veneer of legitimacy. But none of these recent changes has resolved its fate or repaired its vexing problems.","PeriodicalId":40555,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of American Legal Studies","volume":"11 1","pages":"81 - 111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Fate of Lethal Injection: Decomposition of the Paradigm and Its Consequences\",\"authors\":\"Austin D. Sarat, Mattea Denney, Nicolas Graber-Mitchell, Greene Ko, Rose Mroczka, Lauren Pelosi\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.3829078\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article examines the use of lethal injection from 2010–2020. That period marks the “decomposition” of the standard three-drug protocol and the proliferating use of new drugs or drug combinations in American executions. That development is associated with an increase in the number and type of mishaps encountered during lethal injections. This article describes and analyzes those mishaps and the ways death penalty jurisdictions responded, and adapted, to them. It suggests that the recent history of lethal injection echoes the longer history of the death penalty. When states encountered problems with their previous methods of execution, they first attempted to address these problems by tinkering with their existing methods. When tinkering failed, they adopted allegedly more humane execution methods. When they ran into difficulty with the new methods, state actors scrambled to hide the death penalty from public view. New drugs and drug combinations may have allowed the machinery of death to keep running. New procedures may have given the lethal injection process a veneer of legitimacy. But none of these recent changes has resolved its fate or repaired its vexing problems.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40555,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal of American Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"81 - 111\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal of American Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3829078\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of American Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.3829078","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文考察了2010-2020年注射致死的使用情况。这一时期标志着标准的三种药物方案的“分解”,以及新药物或药物组合在美国处决中的激增。这一发展与致命注射过程中遇到的事故数量和类型的增加有关。本文描述和分析了这些不幸事件,以及死刑管辖区对这些事件的反应和适应方式。这表明,最近注射死刑的历史与更长的死刑历史相呼应。当状态在以前的执行方法中遇到问题时,它们首先试图通过修改现有方法来解决这些问题。当修补失败时,他们采用了据称更人道的处决方法。当他们在新方法上遇到困难时,国家行为者争先恐后地将死刑隐藏在公众视野之外。新的药物和药物组合可能让死亡机器继续运转。新的程序可能给注射死刑的过程披上了合法的外衣。但最近的这些变化都没有解决它的命运,也没有解决它令人烦恼的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Fate of Lethal Injection: Decomposition of the Paradigm and Its Consequences
Abstract This article examines the use of lethal injection from 2010–2020. That period marks the “decomposition” of the standard three-drug protocol and the proliferating use of new drugs or drug combinations in American executions. That development is associated with an increase in the number and type of mishaps encountered during lethal injections. This article describes and analyzes those mishaps and the ways death penalty jurisdictions responded, and adapted, to them. It suggests that the recent history of lethal injection echoes the longer history of the death penalty. When states encountered problems with their previous methods of execution, they first attempted to address these problems by tinkering with their existing methods. When tinkering failed, they adopted allegedly more humane execution methods. When they ran into difficulty with the new methods, state actors scrambled to hide the death penalty from public view. New drugs and drug combinations may have allowed the machinery of death to keep running. New procedures may have given the lethal injection process a veneer of legitimacy. But none of these recent changes has resolved its fate or repaired its vexing problems.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
6
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of American Legal Studies is a scholarly journal which publishes articles of interest to the Anglo-American legal community. Submissions are invited from academics and practitioners on both sides of the Atlantic on all aspects of constitutional law having relevance to the United States, including human rights, legal and political theory, socio-legal studies and legal history. International, comparative and interdisciplinary perspectives are particularly welcome. All submissions will be peer-refereed through anonymous referee processes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信