The case was filed under the Civil Rights Act of 1871 [Section 1983, which] permits suits against government officials for violation of rights guaranteed by the Constitution or federal laws.As the unanimous opinion indicates, this is the clear right answer (in a troublesome area of jurisdictional doctrine). Left for another day is the underlying question about the substance of the 8th Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. There the question is how well the different chemicals work. Do they really block the pain or do they only cause the subject to appear to be feeling nothing? As the article says, the Court recently turned down a case that presented the question directly and has avoided intervening in a number of executions where the issue could have been raised.
The lower federal courts dismissed the suit, however, on the ground that the only way for an inmate to challenge the method by which he is to be executed is through a petition for a writ of habeas corpus....
In his opinion for the Supreme Court on Monday, Justice Kennedy said ... that while a habeas corpus petition was the only way to challenge the constitutionality of a sentence, Mr. Hill was challenging not his "lethal injection sentence as a general matter," but only the way in which the sentence was to be carried out.
IN THE COMMENTS: This painting gets discussed: