Does the Eighth Amendment prohibit a method of execution involving conscious suffocation or superadded terror?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Alabama has conducted the only two executions by nitrogen hypoxia in history, executing Kenneth Smith and Alan Miller this year. In doing so, Alabama became the first jurisdiction to use a new method of execution since Texas first employed lethal injection in 1982. Before Mr. Smith’s execution, Alabama represented to this Court he would be unconscious within “seconds” following the administration of nitrogen gas. Instead, according to the execution team captain—responsible for assessing consciousness—Mr. Smith was conscious for several minutes after his breathing air was cut off. The same captain testified that, once the nitrogen began flowing, Mr. Miller’s execution went the same as Mr. Smith’s. The Founders drafted, and the States ratified, the Eighth Amendment, to guarantee no execution would employ superadded pain, terror, or disgrace. In recent decades, this Court and lower courts have focused on the pain prohibition. In denying relief below, the District Court concluded conscious suffocation does not violate the Eighth Amendment or Baze v. Rees, 553 U.S. 35 (2008). The questions presented are: 1. Does the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment bar a method of execution that includes conscious suffocation? 2. Does the Eighth Amendment prohibit a method of execution that involves superadded terror? i