Kevin Johnson: Last November Execution (5/6)

Kevin Johnson, 19, murdered a police officer around seventeen years ago. The facts are tragic, including involving the death of Johnson's younger brother. No wonder it took two tries for a jury to agree how aggravating the crime truly was. It also seems, at least a special prosecutor appointed pursuant to a law particularly passed by Missouri to address erroneous convictions thinks so, the ultimate sentence of death was tainted by racism. 

The U.S. Supreme Court refused without comment to hold up the case last week. The Missouri Supreme Court, after a last minute hearing, refused to hold up the execution this week.  The justices, with Sotomayor and Jackson alone publicly dissenting (without explanation), again without comment refused to hold things up again.  Johnson then was executed. 

Meanwhile, Kevin Johnson's daughter -- now the age he was when he murdered the officer (his age was one more failed argument, one raised a few times regarding people under 21, especially with special circumstances) -- wanted to watch her father died. Under 21, she would not usually be allowed to do so.  Her request was gratuitously rejected.

This follows a theme -- the immediate crime of murder of a police officer likely will not lead many to shed many tears. The details, however, make things more complicated.  

BTW, the one person whose executed was botched totally this month signed an agreement where the state will not execute him by lethal injection. We shall see if he actually will be executed by nitrogen gas.

===

Meanwhile, we had an official reply regarding a senator/representative requesting information regarding the allegation that Alito leaked the Hobby Lobby results or otherwise acted unethically.  

Note that other than a law (which justices never officially accepted as binding) regarding involvement in a case that could be deemed a conflict or appear that way, any ethical guidelines here would be voluntary anyways.  

A few thoughts. First, the notification that he was not somehow financially self-interested is besides the point -- that was not the concern here. As to him knowing the couple because of their involvement with the Supreme Court Historical Society, use of that institution to get access was flagged as a problem. Finally, the "explanation" for the dinner and the whole "don't leave a trail when you respond" (something about having a stomach ailment of something) is hard to take seriously.  

So, the whole thing only convinced (at best) those who want to be convinced. The felt need of an official response via the Court's lawyer suggests the whole thing stings. And, the whole thing has clear "to be continued" flavor to it. We will see if this will help to promote ethics and overall court reform.

===

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court had in person oral arguments, but now the building will be open again to public tours.  The building will be open on argument days only for limited seating (no three minute quickies according to the website), not public tours generally.  Still, this is a major step.

Other things might happen (there are oral arguments, including a big border dispute today, three days this week), but wanted to address these things. See you soon. 

====

ETA: This is why it's good just to wait to the end of Friday (only once did some opinion drop on Saturday in recent memory).  

There were two dissents this month (November) regarding the executions at issue. In one case, as noted, the guy's execution was never completed. It would have been appropriate for the three dissenters to explain why they opposed the vacating of the stay of the lower court as much as for the majority to explain doing so. Net, events were rather telling.

This time Justice Jackson wrote a four page dissent (the ruling dropped later in the day -- the first case having a dissent dropped later, but I still think a brief statement, even "for the reasons stated below," was possible) released today.  She starts this way:

We denied Kevin Johnson’s application for an emergency stay of his execution on November 29, 2022, and the State of Missouri has carried out that penalty. Now, one day later, I write to explain my vote to grant his stay request. For the reasons that follow, in my view, there was a likelihood that Johnson would have succeeded on the merits of his federal due process claim, and it was clear that he would (and obviously did) suffer irreparable harm absent a stay. I also believe that the equities weighed in Johnson’s favor. 

The Supreme Court rarely releases opinions after judgment though lower courts in time sensitive cases do seem occasionally to do it (I saw it happen).  But, it's a sensible thing to do in these last minute execution type cases.  Not the"obviously did" is a reference to him being executed. 

I appreciate Jackson (here, as with her first opinion, another criminal justice dissent in an Order List joined by Sotomayor) doing this. Her reasoning -- Missouri established a procedure and the appellate court here denied the hearing part (due process violation) -- also seems logical. It is not clear why Kagan did not publicly (to cite the lingo) join the opinion.

Additional Details: The new liberal leaning Supreme Court blog has some new essays adding more details, including suggesting maybe I was a bit too easy on Alito regarding financial ethical violations.  We also learn some more details on the controversial Kevin Johnson execution.