It's Illegal for Prisoners Not to Know What Drugs Are Killing Them, Judge Rules

Due process is part of both the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the US Constitution, but its been ignored by the state Oklahoma's execution procedures.

Oklahoma County District Judge Patricia Parrish held that the Oklahoma law that prevents anyone from disclosing the source of drugs used in lethal injection procedure violates the constitutional rights of the inmates to due process, because they are denied information necessary for vetting the drugs.

"I think that the secrecy statute is a violation of due process because access to the courts has been denied," Parrish ruled, according to the AP, adding that the decision "wasn't even close."

Oklahoma’s black hood law only dated back to 2011, when acquiring the drugs from European drug manufacturers suddenly became more difficult. The law states that the “identity of all persons who participate in or administer the execution process and persons who supply the drugs, medical supplies or medical equipment for the execution shall be confidential and shall not be subject to discovery in any civil or criminal proceedings."

The legal challenge filed on behalf of two death row inmates argued that without knowing the source of the drugs, the inmates could not be assured that the drugs were being administered correctly and that the drugs themselves weren’t contaminated.

According to Aaron Cooper, a spokesman for the Attorney General's Office, defended the statute to The Guardian, saying that the matter was already settled on both a state and federal level and that "the entire reason for Oklahoma's confidentiality statute is to protect those who provide lethal injection drugs to the state from threats, coercion and intimidation."

The two inmates Clayton Lockett and Charles Warner sued the state, demanding that it disclose the source the pentobarbital and vecuronium that would kill them during their scheduled executions that were originally scheduled for March 20 and March 27. The executions were moved when it was revealed that the state did not have the necessary drugs on hand to perform the execution, and the inmates’ request for a stay of execution was dismissed as unnecessary.

The source of drugs has become a contentious issue across the country after inmates in Oklahoma and Ohio exhibited signs of suffering during execution.

Neighboring Missouri’s black hood laws have come under scrutiny recently as well, as details. State Rep. Jay Barnes, chairman of the house committee, called Missouri’s statutes “clearly too vague,” and said he believed that the department of corrections should not appear to operate “under secrecy and be able to change vital protocols without legislative oversight.”

The decision in Oklahoma has implications beyond the state’s borders. "Judge Parrish's decision is a major outcome that should have a reverberating impact on other states that are facing similar kinds of transparency issues," Deborah W. Denno, a professor of law at Fordham University, told the AP.

In Oklahoma, though, attorneys for Lockett and Warner are getting closer to the transparency they desire.

"We hope that no execution will go forward until we are able to obtain full information about how Oklahoma intends to conduct those executions, including the source of its execution drugs," federal public defender Madeline Cohen said when the Oklahoma inmates’ execution was delayed earlier this month.

The state itself, which already had put forth a Heculean effort to get lethal injection drugs, vowed to still carry out the executions. Oklahoma assistant attorney general John Hadden told The Guardian that the state will appeal Parrish's decision to the Oklahoma supreme court.