UNITED STATES v. DUSTIN JOHN HIGGS
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI BEFORE JUDGMENT
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH
CIRCUIT AND APPLICATION TO VACATE STAY
[January 15, 2021]
The petition for writ of certiorari before judgment to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit is
granted. The December 29, 2020 order of the United States
District Court for the District of Maryland is reversed, and
the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals with instructions to remand to the District Court for the prompt designation of Indiana under 18 U. S. C. §3596(a).
The application to vacate stay presented to THE CHIEF
JUSTICE and by him referred to the Court is granted. The
January 13, 2021 order of the Court of Appeals granting a
stay is vacated.
20-927 United States v. Higgs (01/15/2021)Sotomayor dissenting
After seventeen years without a single federal execution,
the Government has executed twelve people since July.
They are Daniel Lee, Wesley Purkey, Dustin Honken,
Lezmond Mitchell, Keith Nelson, William LeCroy Jr.,
Christopher Vialva, Orlando Hall, Brandon Bernard, Alfred
Bourgeois, Lisa Montgomery, and, just last night, Corey
Johnson. Today, Dustin Higgs will become the thirteenth.
To put that in historical context, the Federal Government
will have executed more than three times as many people
in the last six months than it had in the previous six decades.
This unprecedented rush of federal executions has predictably given rise to many difficult legal disputes. One
source of confusion has been the Federal Death Penalty Act
(FDPA), which Congress enacted in 1994 to guide the imposition and implementation of federal death sentences. Pub.
L. No. 103–322, Tit. VI, §60002(a), 108 Stat. 1959 (codified
as amended at 18 U. S. C. §3591 et seq.). Prior to last July,
the Federal Government had executed just three people
since the enactment of the FDPA, two in 2001 and one in
2003. Many questions about the FDPA remain unanswered.
****
Sadly, it is not surprising that the Court grants this extraordinary request. Over the past six months, this Court
has repeatedly sidestepped its usual deliberative processes,
often at the Government’s request, allowing it to push forward with an unprecedented, breakneck timetable of executions. With due judicial consideration, some of the Government’s arguments may have prevailed and some or even
many of these executions may have ultimately been allowed
to proceed. Others may not have been. Either way, the
Court should not have sanctioned these executions without
resolving these critical issues. The stakes were simply too
high.
A
Even after thirteen federal executions in six months,
basic, recurring questions about the FDPA and the 2019
Protocol remain unanswered. For example, what does it
mean to “implement[]” a federal death sentence “in the
manner prescribed by the law of the State”? 18 U. S. C.
§3596(a). Answers run the gamut. S
No comments:
Post a Comment