The suit, brought on behalf of 28 death row prisoners, named officials with multiple Oklahoma corrections agencies and claimed the state’s lethal injection method violates the Eighth Amendment because it causes “constitutionally impermissible pain and suffering,” according to the ruling.
In a judgment filed Monday, Judge Stephen Friot of the US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma ruled against the prisoners and upheld the constitutionality of the method.
Ultimately, Friot ruled the prisoners’ attorneys fell “well short of clearing the bar set by the Supreme Court” for lethal injection challenges.
The state’s lethal injection protocol uses a combination of the drugs midazolam as a sedative, vecuronium bromide as a paralytic, and potassium chloride to stop the heart.
Friot described a “battle of the experts” during the week-long trial earlier this year, in which testifying experts frequently and strongly contradicted one another.
“Rarely, in any field of litigation, does a court see and hear well-qualified expert witnesses giving expert testimony as squarely–and emphatically– contradictory, on the issues at the heart of the matter, as this case,” Friot wrote in a statement of facts filed Monday.
Friot concluded Grant’s reaction to being given midazolam was “unsurprising” due to the large dosage of the drug administered after Grant had eaten a large meal.
Friot also rejected “speculation that Grant was conscious during this episode, whether it was vomiting or passive regurgitation,” citing a doctor’s conclusion during the execution that he was unconscious.
Oklahoma Attorney General John O’Connor applauded Friot’s decision Monday, saying, “The State has proven that the drugs and method of execution satisfy the United States and Oklahoma constitutions.”
“Midazolam, as the State has repeatedly shown, ‘can be relied upon … to render the inmate insensate to pain,'” O’Connor said, adding that he intends to seek execution dates from the Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals for inmates awaiting execution.
Jennifer Moreno, attorney for the plaintiffs told CNN, “The district court’s decision ignores the overwhelming evidence presented at trial that Oklahoma’s execution protocol, both as written and as implemented, creates an unacceptable risk that prisoners will experience severe pain and suffering. We are assessing our options for an appeal.”
Prisoners proposed alternative execution methods
In their suit, the death row prisoners proposed two alternative methods of execution: injection of a combination of fentanyl with an anesthetic and death by firing squad.
In his rebuttal of the firing squad method as a viable alternative, Friot concluded that “execution by firing squad, done right, is highly likely to cause a quick death,” however “it is difficult to conceive that a method of execution which requires the sternum to be shattered … can be called painless.”
CNN’s Jason Hanna contributed to this report.