Florida Republicans open door to firing squads, lethal gas as they push death penalty expansion
A bill filed in the Florida state Senate would expand the methods by which death row inmates could be executed.
Senate Bill 1604, introduced by state Sen. Jonathan Martin, R-Fort Myers, aims to protect Florida's status as a death penalty state if certain execution methods like electrocution or legal injection are made unconstitutional by the Supreme Court or the Florida Supreme Court, or if lethal injection drugs are unable to be obtained in the future.
There is currently a shortage of pentobarbital, the drug used for lethal injections, which has several states scrambling to find alternative execution methods.
If that happens in Florida, the bill mandates that "all persons sentenced to death for a capital crime shall be executed by a method not deemed unconstitutional."
Martin told the Tampa Bay Times that his legislation will ensure that the state fulfills the law and follows through on executions.
Tuesday, the bill passed through the Florida Senate's Committee on Criminal Justice.
Wednesday, state Rep. Berny Jaques, R-Largo, introduced a companion bill in the Florida House of Representatives.
"I filed House Bill 903 because I believe government's primary role is to protect public safety, and the death penalty plays a vital part in that," Jaques told Fox News Digital. "This bill ensures Florida can uphold constitutional death sentences without delay by giving the Department of Corrections the flexibility to use any lawful method if current options become unavailable."
The bill does not specify which alternative execution methods could be used, but eight states already authorize the use of some form of lethal gas as a backup to lethal injection, according to the Death Penalty Information Center. In four of those states – Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oklahoma – nitrogen gas is specifically named as the deadly chemical agent used in such executions.
Four other states allow death by firing squad as an alternative to lethal injection, and South Carolina allows it as an alternative to electrocution, its default method of execution.
In March, death row inmate Brad Sigmon of South Carolina was executed by firing squad. He was the first person in the United States to be executed in that manner in more than 15 years.
Lethal injection is by far the most popular execution method, accounting for 1,431 of all executions since 1976. Electrocution is second, accounting for 163.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Nancy Mace said 'due process is for citizens.' Here's who it's really for
In early June 2025, Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina wrote an X post (archived) that read: "Due process is for citizens." Her comment had been viewed more than 2.4 million times as of this writing and had amassed more than 6,500 likes. The same claim has appeared in multiple X posts. In a similar tone, in May 2025, another X user wrote: "Due process is for citizens, not invaders." (X user @NancyMace) In short, due process is the legal principle that the government must follow fair procedures before depriving a person of life, liberty or property. It serves as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by the state, ensuring that people are treated justly under the law. For a more detailed explanation, see our full breakdown in this article on former President Bill Clinton's 1996 immigration law. While Mace's post did not explicitly say that due process protections are, or should be, limited to only U.S. citizens, her replies below the post reinforced that interpretation. However, the U.S. Constitution protects all "persons," not just citizens, under the due-process clauses of the Fifth and 14th amendments. The Supreme Court has repeatedly affirmed that these protections apply to anyone physically present in the United States regardless of citizenship or immigration status. An MSNBC article on the topic similarly concluded that Mace's "implication … that noncitizens don't get that protection" was "incorrect." The South Carolina representative doubled down on her stance in the replies below her post, suggesting that noncitizens should not be entitled to due-process protections in the U.S. For example, when one X user wrote, "The Constitution doesn't say 'only citizens.' Due process applies to persons — that includes non-citizens. That's settled law," Mace replied by saying: "Skip due process coming in, don't expect it going out. Citizens first!" Other replies further suggested she believed only U.S. citizens should be entitled to such protections (archived, archived, archived). (X users @FJBIDEN_22 and @NancyMace) These exchanges were not the first time Mace commented on due process. In late May 2025, she weighed in on the principle in response to a federal judge's decision to block the deportation of eight noncitizens convicted of violent crimes. The day before U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy issued a 17-page order in which he emphasized that "the Court recognizes that the class members at issue here have criminal histories. But that does not change due process," Mace criticized the ruling, telling Fox News (archived): "They didn't want due process on their way in illegally, they shouldn't get due process on their way out." However, the representative's comments about due process contradicted remarks she made about the principle in the past. In February 2023, Mace wrote on X (archived): "Everyone deserves the right to due process. Even those we vehemently oppose." (X user @NancyMace) Snopes has reached out to Mace for comment on whether she maintains that due-process protections should apply only to U.S. citizens and how she reconciles that view with her 2023 statement. We will update this article if we receive a response. The U.S. Constitution's guarantee of due process appears in the Fifth and 14th amendments, both of which state that no person should be deprived "of life, liberty or property, without due process of law." As shown, the language uses "person," not "citizen," with regard to due-process protections. Further, the Supreme Court has repeatedly interpreted that due-process protections apply to everyone within U.S. borders regardless of citizenship or immigration status. In Shaughnessy v. United States ex rel Mezei (1953) the Court emphasized (Page 212) that "aliens who have once passed through [U.S.] gates, even illegally, may be expelled only after proceedings conforming to traditional standards of fairness-encompassed in due process of law." Similarly, in cases such as Zadvydas v. Davis (2001) and earlier decisions dating back more than a century, the Supreme Court made clear that the government cannot detain or deport people arbitrarily. In the 2001 case, the Court underscored that "the Due Process Clause applies to all persons within the United States, including aliens, whether their presence is lawful, unlawful, temporary, or permanent." In simple words, noncitizens must be given fair procedures, such as notice or a "credible fear interview," before being deprived of their liberty. The Supreme Court expressed the same view in the case of Reno v. Flores (1993), stating: "It is well established that the Fifth Amendment entitles aliens to due process of law in deportation proceedings." This was not the first time Snopes addressed a claim regarding Mace. For instance, in late May 2025, we investigated a rumor that she ordered staffers to create burner accounts to promote her online. Meanwhile, earlier in June 2025, we also fact-checked a rumor about whether the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996, signed by Clinton, allowed deportation without due process. "327K Views · 15K Reactions | Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments That Illegal Immigrants Convicted of Heinous Crimes Deserve Due Process after a Judge Blocks a Deportation Flight to South Sudan | 'They Didn't Want Due Process on Their Way in Illegally, They Shouldn't Get Due Process on Their Way Out.' Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) Responds to Arguments... | by Fox News | Facebook." 2022, Accessed 6 June 2025. "U.S. Constitution - Fifth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 15 Dec. 1791, Constitution Annotated. "U.S. Constitution - Fourteenth Amendment | Resources | Constitution Annotated | | Library of Congress." 9 July 1868, Deng, Grace. "Did Nancy Mace Order Staffers to Create Burner Accounts to Promote Her Online? Here's What We Know." Snopes, 30 May 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Dunbar, Marina. "Court Halts Trump Administration's Effort to Send Eight Men to South Sudan." The Guardian, The Guardian, 23 May 2025, Gabbatt, Adam. "Group Stranded with Ice in Djibouti Shipping Container after Removal from US." The Guardian, The Guardian, 6 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. " 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Reno v. Flores, 507 U.S. 292 (1993)." Justia Law, Rubin, Jordan. "Due Process Is Not Limited to Citizens, Contrary to Nancy Mace's Claim." MSNBC, 4 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. Wrona, Aleksandra. "Bill Clinton Did Not Sign Law in 1996 Allowing Deportation without Due Process." Snopes, 5 June 2025, Accessed 6 June 2025. "Zadvydas v. Davis, 533 U.S. 678 (2001)." Justia Law,
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Senator Markey announces plans to file amendment on AI regulation
BOSTON (WWLP) – State Senator Ed Markey (D-Mass.) has announced that he intends to file an amendment on AI regulation. Senator Markey said he plans to file an amendment to the Senate reconciliation bill to block Republicans' attempt to prevent states from regulating AI in the next ten years. Senators in both parties have expressed an interest in regulating artificial intelligence. Car dealership aids relief at Baystate Children's Hospital 'Despite the overwhelming opposition to their plan to block states from regulating artificial intelligence for the next decade, Republicans are refusing to back down on this irresponsible and short-sighted provision,' said Senator Markey. Last Tuesday, the senator delivered remarks on the Senate floor opposing the reconciliation bill passed in the House. He also took part in a virtual roundtable last week with advocates to discuss the ban's impact on communities throughout the United States. 'I plan to file an amendment to strip this dangerous provision from Republicans' 'Big Beautiful Bill,'' Markey said. 'Republicans should be prepared to vote on this outrageous policy and explain to their constituents why they are preventing their state leaders from responding to the harms caused by this new and evolving technology.' WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Schumer says 16 Republicans have ‘discomfort' with green tax credit rollbacks
Democrats are working to convince some 16 of their Republican colleagues to oppose the GOP's policy bill because of its rollbacks to climate-friendly tax credits, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Thursday. 'We have a group … of seven or eight Democrats who are talking to their Republican colleagues … and we're getting some vibes that people realize this bill went too far, and we're hoping they can all go together to John Thune and to Crapo and say, 'Change it. We can't be for it the way it is,'' Schumer told reporters Wednesday, referring to Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) and Finance Committee Chair Mike Crapo (R-Idaho). 'We have a list of 16 Republican senators who have shown some discomfort with this, and that's the main group we're focused on,' he added. The version of the 'big, beautiful bill' passed by House Republicans makes major cuts to tax credits for climate-friendly energy sources, making it so that any project that is not already under construction within 60 days of the law's enactment is ineligible for the tax credits. This provision, among others, is expected to bar many projects from eligibility and could ultimately lead to less low-carbon energy development. At least some Republicans have publicly expressed skepticism of a rapid end to the credits, with Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Thom Tillis (N.C.), John Curtis (Utah) and Jerry Moran (Kan.) warning against a full repeal. However, House Republicans who have championed the cuts are pushing for them to stay in their current form, with members of the Freedom Caucus board recently saying it will 'not accept' changes that water down the cuts. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
