Judge hears arguments over Arkansas lethal injection law

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) – Eight death row inmates have asked a judge to cancel their upcoming lethal injections in Arkansas, where executions have been on hold for a decade, arguing that prison officials’ refusal to reveal where they obtain execution drugs is unconstitutional.

Circuit Court Judge Wendell Griffen wrote in a letter sent Monday to both parties that he will address on Wednesday the state’s first motion for dismissal.

The inmates’ attorneys have also said the secrecy law violates the Arkansas Constitution’s contracts clause, which prohibits the state from passing laws that specifically negate existing contracts.

Last month, The Associated Press identified the three pharmaceutical companies that likely made Arkansas’ execution drugs, all of which said they object to their drugs being used in executions.

States have often turned to lightly regulated compounding pharmacies, which can mix chemicals, for their execution drugs.

Arkansas is the only state in the U.S. South to have not carried out an execution in recent years.

Jeff Rosenzweig, an attorney for the inmates, has said the prisoners fear the secrecy could lead to cruel or unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

The state also argued that the law is constitutional.

Numerous 31 states that have the death penalty have been scrambling for lethal injection chemicals after drug makers in Europe began banning sales to prison systems about four years due to ethical concerns.

“There is nothing other than a lawyer’s word that these drugs are FDA-approved”, Lee said. One of the companies has said it is pressing the Arkansas Department of Correction for information but hadn’t heard back.

Shortly after Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson set execution dates for the eight inmates who had exhausted all of their appeals, the inmates’ attorneys requested an immediate, temporary delay of the executions until the case can be finalized.

“It is not enough for a person to allege that a slightly or marginally safer alternative exists”, Merritt said. “They knew it was going to be so important that they insisted on a term in a contract requiring the [department] to make those disclosures”. She referred questions to the Attorney General’s Office, where spokesman Judd Deere said the lengthy filing was being reviewed and that the office would have no further comment Tuesday.