Justices block Texas execution (Chaplain Debate: Part III)

After Missouri executed someone, it looked like Texas might as well when a challenge on procedural (DNA testing) and religious liberty claim (right have a chaplain in the execution chamber) was rejected. The first given the grounds of his prosecution (did not require directly murdering; assisting would have been enough) was perhaps weak though it very well might have factored into his death sentence. The long time on death row (twenty years) etc. not at issue as such though for me it is relevant.

But, the religious claim is stronger. As noted, the Supreme Court asking the district court weigh the need of the rule suggests some concern it is not neutral. If you recall, it was a result of a battle over an attempt to get a non-Christian chaplain, which led Texas to simply disallow any. Kavanaugh rejected selectively providing chaplains but accepted a neutral blanket rule not doing so. Alito dissented on procedural grounds, but flagged a serious interest was at issue including under a federal law (RLUIPA) protecting religious liberty. Even in the face of general applicable rules that don't target religion as such. The lower court opinion is a bit dismissive of that last concern particularly.

So, it is not really shocking that the Supreme Court blocked the execution last night to settle this issue though it all seems rather gratuitous (but discrimination often is): a neutral rule can be placed and Texas can go forward in executing their arbitrarily selected "lottery" winners. Respect for religious beliefs at death is not a trivial matter.