Florida is scheduled to execute Michael Bell today for the deaths of two people outside a Jacksonville bar in 1993. Bell is the 26th person to run this year, with 2025 running higher than any of the past decade. It’s only in July, so that numbers could continue to increase.
There have also been several well-known conflicts over potentially innocent people facing executions in recent months. Marcellus Williams was executed in Missouri in September despite prosecutors’ attempts to break the conviction. Questions about the innocence of Robert Roberson, who has been on Texas death row since 2003, sparked a branch-to-branch conflict in Texas. And Richard Grossip, who has remained innocent for decades on Oklahoma death row inmate, agreed, arguing that the prosecution’s misconduct and withheld evidence justified a new trial before the U.S. Supreme Court.
In that case, I spoke with John Mills, one of Grosship’s lawyers. Mills, along with the public law firm Phillips Black, represents those sentenced to death and those sentenced to service. Mills spoke about allowing unverified methods of enforcement of recent laws, racial disparities in the death penalty, and more. This interview has been compiled for brevity and clarity.
There were six It was run in June. 25 people have been killed this year. Is that typical?
It was a particularly terrifying year. Florida is new and very active in doing it. Oklahoma had to expand the time between executions due to the trauma that had caused security guards in prison. The Attorney General asked that enforcement was spaced 90 days apart, and they have done them about every 90 days. Kentucky has announced that it will seek a first-time run date for a very long time. Arizona had been suspended for nearly a decade in executions, but its first execution of the year took place.
And the state is experimenting with new ways to execute people and kill them in even more frightening ways, like nitrogen gas and fire squads.
However, while there was an increase in implementation, there was also a long-term trend to the contrary. It’s a dramatic decline in new death sentences.
Why do you think some states are resuming executions after a long break?
Unfortunately, I think it has something to do with political pressure. I think Kentucky’s (Governor Andy) Besher will see him as a presidential candidate in a few years. Even in Arizona, I’m worried that they see it as a good political theatre and that it looks harsh to Democrats against crime in politically vulnerable states. Remember that when Bill Clinton was running for president as governor of Arkansas, he was very publicly present to demonstrate his commitment to “justice.”
He mentioned executions using nitrogen gas. Is that a new way to do it?
yes. Alabama is the only state that has carried out executions with nitrogen gas, and there is strong evidence to suggest that it doesn’t work. People are coughing and choking during executions, and the coroner’s report shows trauma. The execution takes much longer than anyone said.
In addition to nitrogen gas, some states have recently moved to shooting squads and electrocution as a way of conduct. What is the reason for that shift?
Lethal injections have long been the main way of doing it. However, obtaining deadly injectable medication has always been difficult for the state. Pharmaceutical companies produce medicine, not poison, and they don’t want drugs to be involved in executions. They also know that it’s bad for the business. On the other hand, guns are readily available. Nitrogen gas is not difficult to obtain either. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly made it clear that it is not interested in the challenges of interpretation methods.. sTates is more willing to experiment as a direct result of federal courts involved and trying to stop them.
Can a state constitution protect people facing the death penalty more than their federal counterparts?
States should be willing to give constitutional clauses independent meaning. They should be a laboratory for constitutional experiments. There’s an opportunity there. Many states already recognize that constitutional provisions that limit the ability of constitutional provisions to provide severe penalties can be broader or broader than federal protections.
Some states prohibit cruel or unusual, or mere cruel punishments, as opposed to the “cruel and unusual” language of Article 8 of the Commonwealth. The case of an independent interpretation may be strongest when there are clauses that are completely different from federal constitutional clauses, such as the clauses in some states that prohibit treating people in custody with unnecessary rigor.
There is also the opportunity to utilize the unique interpretation methods of various states. Some states employ originality as a paradigm of constitutional interpretation, but were established at a very different era from the federal government. For example, Arizona was founded at the peak of progressive power both in the state and across the nation, so the originalist interpretation of Arizona’s constitution, as a member of the establishment treaty at the time, prioritizes rehabilitation and reintegration into society.
Were there any constitutional challenges in the state to address the racial disparities of the death penalty?
The Washington State High Court abolished the death penalty in light of racist application. They did so by relying on an independent interpretation of their constitutional texts. There are also challenges pending the racist application of California’s death penalty under the state’s equal protection clause. State Public Defense Service vs. Bonta.
Black people account for 41% of death row inmates, despite only 13% of the population. And recent executions across the country have overwhelmingly white casualties. Of the 26 of the final executions, 25 were crimes against white victims.
Using the death penalty along such racialized lines is consistent with what we know. We tend to rate people differently based on their race. We tend to evaluate that someone’s behavior is based on their race. There is even social science that people assume that black men are older than they are actually compared to white men, which affects negligence decisions. Racism lives very much within the death penalty.
Pending Florida Supreme Court Litigation assignment The practice of communicating death penalty even if all of the ju judges do not agree. Is there any problem with allowing non-meaning ju judges?
We apologize for the non-meaning jukyo, but it has a history. in Ramos in Louisianathe US Supreme Court has granted that they are being used to disenfranchise Black Jury, and that they will also ensure convictions can be secured in opposition votes from Black Jury. Oregon’s history of non-meaning ju-describers is similar. They used them to exclude Jews from meaningful participation in the ju-referee service.
They also contribute to reliability and reduce the voice of the community. Rules like Florida mean that when a ju judge wins 8 out of 12 votes, deliberations can be stopped. If there are some holdouts, they may be able to convince fellow ju-degree members to change their minds. However, if the ju apprentice does not need all agree, it is unlikely that the ju apprentice will end the deliberation in that way. And of course, exclude minority voices from a decisive vote is damaging the jury to exclude, the health and perception of the judicial system, and basic equity.
Some states have conflicts Government branch Managing the Death Penalty Tell us about some of those conflicts.
They are countless. For example, in Arizona, prison prosecutors could run for Attorney General because they don’t think the current Attorney General wants adequate executions. The same prosecutor tried to break policies and precedents by seeking an execution warrant if the Attorney General (the person responsible for litigating warrants) did not seek them.
After the prosecutor’s political threat and legal conspiracy, the Attorney General suddenly terminated an independent investigation into the state’s enforcement practices and resumed it in search of enforcement. The running branch dispute was highly consequential.
Disputes like these reinforce my longstanding view that at least the death penalty is a highly controversial practice. When people get closer to it in terms of understanding how it is done, they don’t think there’s much need to do it. Many state policies and practices support this. As a policy issue, people want to have the ability to invoke atrocities that deserve extreme condemnation. But when it’s time to actually run someone, only a small number of people who may qualify for death will receive it.
You represent Richard Grossip. Please tell me about that case.
Richard Grossip was convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Oklahoma County. In the last year or two years ago, most people knew about Richard’s case because of a groundbreaking decision on a lethal injection that allowed the use of the Oklahoma triad protocol. Glossipv. Gross.
Richard has always maintained his innocence. rear Glossipv. Grosslaw firm Reed Smith conducted a comprehensive investigation into his case and discovered several extensive investigations. Brady Especially infringement. I brought it along with my colleagues, received a report of the facts, and converted it into a national (and federal government if necessary). We accessed more information the state held, including evidence that Richard believed that the actual perpetrator had lyed and misunderstood the Ju Court.
We were fortunate to have been able to get the execution maintenance from the US Supreme Court in Richard’s case. The court narrowly held that he was entitled to a new trial.
The Oklahoma Attorney General previously said Richard’s beliefs were not supported on the basis of records. It’s not just a belief. However, he then decides to try Richard again. Thankfully, he is not seeking death this time.
Has attitudes towards the death penalty changed over the past few decades?
According to the Pew Research Center, there has been a slow and consistent decline in the death penalty support for the death penalty. The best indicator of how much support for the death penalty is to see people who have to hand it over. Ju judges are increasingly refusing to die. Prosecutors refuse to seek death.
Suggested Quote: Kathrina (Kasia) Szymborski Wolfkot (interviewed by John Mills), When executions rise, clients have conversations with lawyers facing death penaltysᴛᴛᴇcᴏᴜʀᴛrᴇᴘᴏʀᴛ (July 15, 2025), https://statcourtreport.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/executions-ris-conversation-attorney-Who’s Client – Facing Das
