SCOTUS Watch: Another Execution etc.

Two Executions 

Texas executed two people this week who were mentally ill.  Gary Green murdered his wife and her daughter (age six), the sons (9 and 12) convincing him not to kill them. He reportedly tried to commit suicide.  One story tells us:

Green was prescribed medication for schizophrenia and depression after a four-day stay at a psychiatric hospital just a month before the murders, but could not afford to continue taking it, the Observer reported, citing a memo from Mowla.

In March 2022, SCOTUS denied Gary Green's petition asking it to review claims that he was visibly shackled in front of the jury during the penalty phase of the trial.  His lawyers did not try any last-minute appeals.  

He was executed earlier this week. 

Arthur Brown's road to the death chamber was much longer. His lawyers also tried a last-minute appeal raising intellectual disability claims.  This included a procedural claim that he didn't even get to make his case.  There were also other concerns:

Arthur Brown Jr. has been sitting on death row since 1994. He was convicted based on bad forensics and potentially flawed eyewitness accounts, which newly discovered evidence long suppressed by the Harris County District Attorney’s Office calls into question. 

As Justice Breyer noted in Glossip v. Gross, being on death row for nearly thirty years alone is problematic.  Two more dubious executions. One more case where not a single justice (including Jackson, who recently had a street named after her) said a word.  

Technically, no justice voted on the record, so we only know there was a majority (one supposes five, but technically only six justices are needed for a quorum, so why not four?) supporting the denial. 

We are supposed to say that we don't know if anyone dissented.  Silence doesn't technically mean consent and in the past justices have opposed things without doing so publicly.  That is a bit weak and even reporters (like Kimberly Robinson) have been known to not buy into it.  

Like bland references to a "short order" that is just a pro forma denial with no content, I'm not big on this "no one knows bit."  So, I am glad that Amy Howe framed it this way:

If any of the justices dissented from the denial of Brown’s plea for a stay of his execution, they did not note their disagreement publicly.

Anyway, he too was executed. Texas has another execution scheduled later this month.  Expect more silence then too.  

===

Odds and Ends 

I regularly check the Supreme Court website to see if there are any updates.  Someone looking closely at the opinion page will note that (long before it usually happens) the slip opinions for this term have already been started to be put in a preliminary version of the bound reports.  

There will be a conference next week as well as a special event to honor Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg. Maybe, the person she hoped on her deathbed would never replace her will say a few words.  

===

Quid Pro Quo

Another reported matter is that the Supreme Court has asked for additional money, highlighting the need for more security resources. As with a recent law protecting the privacy of family members, I do not begrudge such things.  There were serious issues, including federal judges or their families being threatened or even murdered.  

But, it offers an opening to provide strings. The primary one that comes to mind is an ethics code.  The ethics problems are glaring and it is a valid quid pro quo.  There is just so much you can do -- investigations come to mind -- besides confirming a lot of lower court judges. If they want more money, fine, accept strings. 

I would toss in more probably, including more openness such as audio and video (at least for non-argument procedures like opinion announcements).  Ethics is a minimum.