Louisiana judge stops use of nitrogen hypoxia for executions
SHREVEPORT, La. (KTAL/KMSS) – A victory for opponents of Louisiana's decision to execute a man using nitrogen hypoxia as a federal judge grants their Eighth Amendment argument that gassing is cruel and unusual punishment.
Louisiana Chief District Judge Shelly Dick granted a motion for a preliminary injunction filed by attorneys for Jesse Hoffman who is scheduled to be executed by the state on March 18.
Hoffman's argument is not an attempt to deny guilt or prevent the state from executing him, it questions the state's chosen manner of execution and what Hoffman's attorneys call secrecy in the state's explanation of execution protocol.
He is asking that his execution be carried out by firing squad or a life-ending cocktail known as DDMAPh.
More Louisiana News
The argument that was granted is based on the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits excessive bail, fines, and cruel and unusual punishments.
In her explanation Judge Dick said, 'The Court finds that Plaintiff has clearly shown a substantial likelihood that (1) making the condemned breath pure nitrogen until dead cruelly superadds pain and suffering to the execution when compared to firing squad; (2) firing squad is 'feasible, readily implemented, and in fact significantly reduce[s] a substantial risk of severe pain;' and (3) that the State has failed to adopt firing squad as a method of execution without a legitimate penological reason.'
The judge noted that DDMAPh, although used in compassionate end of life care or assisted suicide, is not easily accessible for executions carried out by the state, and Louisiana has struggled to secure it previously.
Ultimately the judge believed that Hoffman's claims that nitrogen hypoxia superadds psychological pain, suffering, and terror to his execution when compared to execution by firing squad. Saying the state had no legitimate reason related to the state's penal system for not adopting, as the choice of which execution method the state utilizes is a decision left up to state's Director of Public Safety and Corrections (DPSC).
'The public has an interest in knowing how its government operates. The obfuscation of the protocol by the State is deleterious to the public's interest. The United States Constitution is simply the government's promises to its citizens. The Eighth Amendment is the government's assurance that no citizen will be punished by means that are cruel and unusual. Courts are the arbiter of whether the government honors this promise to her people. It is in the best interests of the public to examine this newly proposed method of execution on a fully developed record. The public has paramount interest in a legal process that enables thoughtful and well-informed deliberations, particularly when the ultimate fundamental right, the right to life, is placed in the government's hands. Accordingly, Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction is granted.'
Chief District Judge Shelly Dick
Read Judge Dick's ruling here
Hoffman-PI-OrderDownload
Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill said, 'We disagree with the district court's decision and will immediately appeal to the Fifth Circuit Court.'
Those who oppose Louisiana using nitrogen gas for state executions have argued that the cruel and unusual aspect is why it is prohibited as a method of euthanasia for companion animals in 48 states.
Priest and Death Row Spiritual Advisor Rev. Dr. Jeff Hood was vocal about Hoffman's execution and executions in Alabama, the only other state that uses nitrogen hypoxia. In a statement Hood said, 'Lucifer didn't win today. Judge Shelly Dick has heard the cries of those of us who have actually witnessed a nitrogen hypoxia execution. Let there be no doubt, nitrogen hypoxia is one of the cruelest and most unusual forms of punishment to ever exist.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
He Fell Behind on His Taxes. So the Government Seized His Home, Sold It, and Kept the $258,000 Profit.
First the government seized Kenneth Michael Sikorsky's home and all of its equity over a tax debt worth far less than what it took. Now a federal court has ruled that Sikorsky has successfully stated a claim for a taking—an early sign that the legal landscape is shifting since the Supreme Court weighed in on these sorts of seizures two years ago. In 2012, the city of Newburgh, New York, foreclosed on Sikorsky's house after he fell behind on his property taxes. The parties were later able to broker an agreement that allowed him to repurchase the home for the price of his outstanding debt. But he was unable to satisfy those regular installments, prompting the city to cancel the sale. The government later found another buyer who could pay much more than the value of Sikorsky's debt, which with penalties, interest, and fees stood at $92,786.24. The sale went through in June 2021 for $350,500. The city then pocketed the profit: $257,713.76. Sikorsky is far from the first person to experience this nightmare scenario. But his case coincided with a petition that would upend the practice nationwide. Geraldine Tyler argued that the practice was unconstitutional after Hennepin County, Minnesota, seized her Minneapolis condo over a modest tax debt, sold it, and kept the profit. This worked its way through the court system until 2023, when the Supreme Court sided with Tyler. "A taxpayer who loses her $40,000 house to the State to fulfill a $15,000 tax debt has made a far greater contribution to the public fisc than she owed," wrote Chief Justice John Roberts for the unanimous Court. "The taxpayer must render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but no more." The decision centered around the Takings Clause of the 5th Amendment, which says the government cannot take private property without providing "just compensation." So foreclosing on a property to collect a debt is constitutional, but pocketing the profit is not. Sikorsky's suit made it to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York shortly after that ruling. Sounds like perfect timing, yet the court ruled against him. But now the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has ruled that he can, in fact, sue for his equity under the Takings Clause, resuscitating his suit and sending it back to the district court for review. While the high court ruled the practice unconstitutional, several states—including Arizona, Alabama, New Jersey, and Sikorsky's home of New York—responded by passing labyrinthine debt collection statutes that seek to technically comply with the law while simultaneously making it difficult for property owners to collect their surplus equity. Michigander Chelsea Koetter, for example, lost her house in 2021 over a $3,863.40 tax debt. Manistee County, Michigan, then auctioned it off and kept the $102,636 profit. But the state's supreme court had already ruled the practice illegal in 2020—after which the Legislature approved a debt-collection law that sends owners on an obstacle course should they want to get their leftover equity back. Koetter, according to her complaint, submitted a form 8 days late, which the government said justified its decision to keep her six figures of equity. In Sikorsky's case, New York's new statute applies only to people whose properties were sold on or after May 25, 2023, so he will get to proceed under the Takings Clause of the U.S. Constitution instead. But future plaintiffs who lose everything after falling on hard times may find it much harder to recover their money. The post He Fell Behind on His Taxes. So the Government Seized His Home, Sold It, and Kept the $258,000 Profit. appeared first on
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
Former local news anchor sues rival station for defamation over report he says portrayed him as a ‘child predator'
A former local news anchor in Shreveport, Louisiana, has sued a rival station for defamation, accusing it of engaging in 'character assassination' after it ran a report he says portrayed him as a 'child predator.' Emmy Award-winning journalist Bill Lunn, a former anchor for ABC affiliate KTBS, filed the lawsuit late last month against rival local outlet KTAL, its married co-anchors Daniel and Jacquelyn Jovic, and its owner, Nexstar. The complaint was filed almost one year after Lunn resigned from KTBS in advance of a KTAL report claiming Lunn had been busted by 'vigilantes targeting men seeking to prey on underage girls.' Lunn had been cleared by a police investigation, and no charges were filed — a fact KTAL included in its report. Nevertheless, the former anchor said in his lawsuit that KTAL and Nexstar failed to 'vet, edit or confirm allegations that labeled him a child predator.' Lunn resigned to spare his employer any embarrassment, he said in the lawsuit, 'with the intention and hope to return to work once the facts cleared his name.' However, the lawsuit alleges the KTAL report ultimately 'ended his career in broadcast journalism.' The former anchor alleged that KTAL targeted him because of their two stations' rivalry in the Shreveport market. 'Jovic and his co-Defendants seized on the opportunity to bend the facts to their will in an attempt (to) take out or otherwise substantially interfere with the market leader and their direct competitor, Lunn,' the lawsuit alleges. Lunn downloaded the popular dating app Tinder on May 27, 2024, and was sent a message of 'interest' from a person he thought was a 19-year-old woman the same day, according to the lawsuit. Shortly thereafter, Lunn was asked to text the woman on her cellphone, after which she 'initiated a sexually explicit exchange.' Two days after the initial message, the supposed 19-year-old invited Lunn to her home, where he was ushered in by a woman. Upon entry, Lunn was 'beaten and robbed of his belongings' by a trio of men. After escaping the house, Lunn returned home and, with the help of another person, called the Shreveport Police Department, according to the lawsuit. Once police arrived, Lunn recounted the night's events and provided his cellphone to aid in law enforcement's investigation, at which point he noticed that the woman had edited her age in a text message from 19 to 16, the lawsuit says. Her Tinder profile, however, still showed her as being 19 years old. In the days that followed, Daniel Jovic, the rival reporter, contacted a police source to inquire whether Lunn had been found with a 14-year-old girl and whether he had fled from the police, according to the lawsuit. Jovic was told Lunn did not run, that no arrests were made and that the investigation was ongoing, the lawsuit says. Jovic interviewed the trio of men for a newscast he led with his co-anchor and wife, Jacquelyn, which was broadcast on June 3, 2024. According to the lawsuit, that newscast allegedly 'lied, misrepresented, and ignored the evidence in their possession,' relying on 'an interview conducted with a wholesale lack of diligence.' 'After meeting them, Jovic engaged in leading and calculated questioning eventually eliciting some 'facts' that, despite the source and Jovic's own training and knowledge as to their questionable truth or veracity, culminated in the false broadcast that derailed Lunn's career,' the lawsuit read. The next day, Daniel Jovic published a story on KTAL's website, revealing the group of local so-called predator hunters 'pretending to be an underage girl in an effort to 'catfish' local men who are allegedly trying to meet up for sex.' Despite publishing two subsequent stories — one reporting Lunn's denials and another reporting that police cleared Lunn — KTAL and the Jovic couple have 'never acknowledged, corrected, or retracted their numerous defamatory broadcasts in which they named Petitioner a child predator,' the lawsuit says. A Nexstar lawyer told Lunn's attorney that the company 'stands by the journalist and the stories as presented,' according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not list a specific dollar amount in damages sought by Lunn. However, he 'demands a trial by jury' in order to 'hold these Defendants accountable for their actions.' Nexstar, KTAL, Daniel Jovic and Jacquelyn Jovic did not immediately respond to CNN requests for comment.
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
Former local news anchor sues rival station for defamation over report he says portrayed him as a ‘child predator'
A former local news anchor in Shreveport, Louisiana, has sued a rival station for defamation, accusing it of engaging in 'character assassination' after it ran a report he says portrayed him as a 'child predator.' Emmy Award-winning journalist Bill Lunn, a former anchor for ABC affiliate KTBS, filed the lawsuit late last month against rival local outlet KTAL, its married co-anchors Daniel and Jacquelyn Jovic, and its owner, Nexstar. The complaint was filed almost one year after Lunn resigned from KTBS in advance of a KTAL report claiming Lunn had been busted by 'vigilantes targeting men seeking to prey on underage girls.' Lunn had been cleared by a police investigation, and no charges were filed — a fact KTAL included in its report. Nevertheless, the former anchor said in his lawsuit that KTAL and Nexstar failed to 'vet, edit or confirm allegations that labeled him a child predator.' Lunn resigned to spare his employer any embarrassment, he said in the lawsuit, 'with the intention and hope to return to work once the facts cleared his name.' However, the lawsuit alleges the KTAL report ultimately 'ended his career in broadcast journalism.' The former anchor alleged that KTAL targeted him because of their two stations' rivalry in the Shreveport market. 'Jovic and his co-Defendants seized on the opportunity to bend the facts to their will in an attempt (to) take out or otherwise substantially interfere with the market leader and their direct competitor, Lunn,' the lawsuit alleges. Lunn downloaded the popular dating app Tinder on May 27, 2024, and was sent a message of 'interest' from a person he thought was a 19-year-old woman the same day, according to the lawsuit. Shortly thereafter, Lunn was asked to text the woman on her cellphone, after which she 'initiated a sexually explicit exchange.' Two days after the initial message, the supposed 19-year-old invited Lunn to her home, where he was ushered in by a woman. Upon entry, Lunn was 'beaten and robbed of his belongings' by a trio of men. After escaping the house, Lunn returned home and, with the help of another person, called the Shreveport Police Department, according to the lawsuit. Once police arrived, Lunn recounted the night's events and provided his cellphone to aid in law enforcement's investigation, at which point he noticed that the woman had edited her age in a text message from 19 to 16, the lawsuit says. Her Tinder profile, however, still showed her as being 19 years old. In the days that followed, Daniel Jovic, the rival reporter, contacted a police source to inquire whether Lunn had been found with a 14-year-old girl and whether he had fled from the police, according to the lawsuit. Jovic was told Lunn did not run, that no arrests were made and that the investigation was ongoing, the lawsuit says. Jovic interviewed the trio of men for a newscast he led with his co-anchor and wife, Jacquelyn, which was broadcast on June 3, 2024. According to the lawsuit, that newscast allegedly 'lied, misrepresented, and ignored the evidence in their possession,' relying on 'an interview conducted with a wholesale lack of diligence.' 'After meeting them, Jovic engaged in leading and calculated questioning eventually eliciting some 'facts' that, despite the source and Jovic's own training and knowledge as to their questionable truth or veracity, culminated in the false broadcast that derailed Lunn's career,' the lawsuit read. The next day, Daniel Jovic published a story on KTAL's website, revealing the group of local so-called predator hunters 'pretending to be an underage girl in an effort to 'catfish' local men who are allegedly trying to meet up for sex.' Despite publishing two subsequent stories — one reporting Lunn's denials and another reporting that police cleared Lunn — KTAL and the Jovic couple have 'never acknowledged, corrected, or retracted their numerous defamatory broadcasts in which they named Petitioner a child predator,' the lawsuit says. A Nexstar lawyer told Lunn's attorney that the company 'stands by the journalist and the stories as presented,' according to the lawsuit. The lawsuit does not list a specific dollar amount in damages sought by Lunn. However, he 'demands a trial by jury' in order to 'hold these Defendants accountable for their actions.' Nexstar, KTAL, Daniel Jovic and Jacquelyn Jovic did not immediately respond to CNN requests for comment.
