Lethal Injection Protocol Violates Rights of Press and Public

The ACLU of Northern California filed a lawsuit this spring raising a constitutional challenge to California’s three-drug execution protocol.  Filed on behalf of Pacific News Service, PNS v. Woodford states that part of the three-drug regimen used to carry out executions in California acts as a chemical curtain.  PNS believes the drug conceals significant information, violating the First Amendment rights of the press and the public to be fully informed about executions.

The state of California uses a three drug combination to carry out executions: first, sodium pentothal, a short-acting barbiturate; second, pancuronium bromide, a drug which paralyzes all voluntary muscles; and third, potassium chloride, which causes cardiac arrest.

The PNS lawsuit focuses on the second drug, stating that it serves no legitimate purpose in the execution and masks any potential pain or suffering to which the inmate is subjected. 

The ACLU-NC is seeking a permanent injunction to prevent the California Department of Corrections and San Quentin State Prison from using pancuronium bromide, also known as Pavulon.

"The drugs that the State uses to carry out executions put up what amounts to a chemical curtain that hides what really goes on in the death chamber,” said Jon Streeter, ACLU-NC cooperating attorney with the law firm of Keker & Van Nest, LLP. “In the name of freedom of the press, we are demanding that the State take that curtain down.”

In an earlier ACLU case, CFAC v. Woodford, decided in 2002, the federal courts held that the actual curtain that was used at the first lethal execution in California “was motivated at least in part by a desire to conceal the harsh reality of executions from the public.”

“Today we have the same First Amendment concern in this case – that this chemical curtain does nothing more than sanitize the process by preventing the press and the public from being accurately informed about how the State is implementing its ultimate penalty, ” said Alan Schlosser, ACLU-NC Legal Director.

The method and drug combination used in California executions are also the subject of another current lawsuit, Morales v. Woodford. Michael Morales, a prisoner on death row, was scheduled to receive a lethal injection on February 21.

His attorneys argued that California’s execution procedures constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The injection was canceled after San Quentin State Prison could not comply with U.S. District Judge Jeremy Fogel's order for changes to ensure Morales would not feel excruciating pain.