logo
Lethal injection, electrocution and now firing squads. A look at US execution methods

Lethal injection, electrocution and now firing squads. A look at US execution methods

Independent03-03-2025

South Carolina is preparing this week to execute a man by firing squad, a capital punishment method that hasn't been used in the U.S. in nearly 15 years.
Since the Supreme Court lifted its ban on capital punishment in 1976, states have used five different execution methods: lethal injection, electrocution, lethal gas, firing squad and hanging.
Brad Sigmon is scheduled to die Friday in South Carolina. He was convicted of killing his ex-girlfriend's parents with a baseball bat at their home in 2001.
Here's a look at how the U.S. executes people:
Most US executions are by lethal injection
Lethal injection has been the preferred method in the modern era, with 1,428 carried out since 1976. Texas has done the most, killing 593 inmates, according to the Death Penalty Information Center, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit center.
Twenty-eight states as well as the U.S. military and U.S. government authorize the use of lethal injection, in which an inmate has a deadly mixture of drugs injected into them as they are strapped to a gurney.
But throughout its use, lethal injection has been plagued by problems, including delays in finding suitable veins, needles becoming clogged or disengaged and problems with securing enough of the required drugs.
'A number of states are beginning to experiment with new methods of execution ... because of the problems with lethal injection,' said John Banzhaf, a professor emeritus of law at George Washington University Law School.
Use of electrocution is down since 2000
Nine states authorize the use of electrocution, including Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Tennessee. Since 1976, 163 electrocutions have been carried out. But only 19 have been done since 2000.
In this method, a person is strapped to a chair and has electrodes placed on their head and leg before a jolt of between 500 and 2,000 volts runs through their body. The last electrocution took place in 2020 in Tennessee.
Texas used electrocution from 1924 to 1964, killing 361 inmates, according to the state's Department of Criminal Justice. The electric chair Texas used was nicknamed 'Old Sparky.' It is now displayed at the Texas Prison Museum in Huntsville, where the state's death chamber is located.
Alabama resumes the use of lethal gas
Lethal gas is authorized as the default execution method in eight states: Alabama, Arizona, California, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma and Wyoming.
From 1979 to 1999, 11 inmates were executed using this method, in which a prisoner would be strapped to a chair in an airtight chamber before it was filled with cyanide gas.
In 2024, Alabama revived this method when it became the first state to use nitrogen gas to execute Kenneth Eugene Smith. A mask is placed over a prisoner's face and nitrogen gas is pumped in, depriving the person of oxygen and resulting in death.
Alabama's last such execution took place in February.
Firing squads are rarely used in the modern era
Since 1977, only three inmates have been executed by firing squad and all were in Utah, with the last one in 2010, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Five states including Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah authorize its use, but it is not the primary execution method. For this method, an inmate is usually bound to a chair and is shot through the heart by a group of prison staffers standing 20 to 25 feet (6 to 7.6 meters) away.
Idaho has had firing squad executions on the books as a backup if lethal injection drugs are unavailable since 2023. But in the wake of last year's botched lethal injection attempt on Thomas Eugene Creech, lawmakers are considering a bill to make firing squads the primary execution method.
The bill's sponsor, Republican Sen. Doug Ricks, has suggested Idaho could use a firing squad machine, triggering the guns electronically to eliminate the need for additional execution team members.
Hanging was once the primary execution method
In the U.S., hanging was the main method of execution until about the 1890s, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Data collected by researchers of U.S. executions from 1608 to 2002 found 9,322 people were put to death by hanging, in which a person was blindfolded and their hands and legs were secured before a noose was placed around the neck and they fell through a trap door.
But in capital punishment's modern era, only three individuals in the U.S. have been executed by hanging in 1993, 1994 and 1996. New Hampshire's remaining death row inmate could be executed by hanging if lethal injection is not available.
___
___
Follow Juan A. Lozano on X at juanlozano70.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump says Abrego Garcia's return to US 'wasn't my decision'
Trump says Abrego Garcia's return to US 'wasn't my decision'

The Herald Scotland

time17 minutes ago

  • The Herald Scotland

Trump says Abrego Garcia's return to US 'wasn't my decision'

Abrego Garcia, a sheet metal worker and father of three from Maryland, was wrongly deported to El Salvador in March despite a 2019 court order barring his removal. His case drew national attention, after a standoff among the Trump administration, the courts and some congressional Democrats over his release. In April, a unanimous Supreme Court ordered the Trump administration to "facilitate" Abrego Garcia's return to the United States. Officials claimed they couldn't force a sovereign nation - El Salvador - to relinquish a prisoner. The Trump administration insists that Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang, but a federal judge had previously questioned the strength of the government's evidence. Abrego Garcia denies being a gang member. Now, the Maryland man faces new charges on American soil. At a June 6 press conference, U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi accused Abrego Garcia of making over 100 trips to smuggle undocumented immigrants across the nation. The indictment against Abrego Garcia alleges that he and co-conspirators worked with people in other countries to transport immigrants from El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Ecuador, and Mexico, and then took the people from Houston to Maryland, often varying their routes, and coming up with cover stories about construction if they were pulled over. Trump told NBC News he believes "it should be a very easy case" for federal prosecutors. But Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, a lawyer for Abrego Garcia, criticized the Justice Department for bringing these charges at all: "Due process means the chance to defend yourself before you're punished, not after. This is an abuse of power, not justice." Contributing: USA TODAY Staff

New questions emerge from the new charges in Kilmar Abrego Garcia case
New questions emerge from the new charges in Kilmar Abrego Garcia case

NBC News

timea day ago

  • NBC News

New questions emerge from the new charges in Kilmar Abrego Garcia case

The sudden return of Kilmar Abrego-Garcia to the United States on Friday to face federal charges of smuggling migrants across the country was a messaging triumph for the Trump administration. The news deflected public attention from a series of unanimous court rulings —including a Supreme Court decision —that President Donald Trump did not have the power to unilaterally detain and deport individuals to foreign prisons without a review by a judge. And the allegations against Abrego-Garcia are damning. A federal grand jury found that the 29-year-old was an MS-13 member who transported thousands of undocumented immigrants, including children, from Texas to states across the country for profit for nine years. He allegedly also transported firearms and drugs, abused female migrants and was linked to an incident in Mexico where a tractor-trailer overturned and killed 50 migrants. Simon Sandoval-Moshenberg, a lawyer representing Abrego-Garcia, said Saturday that he planned to meet his client for the first time on Sunday, but declined to further comment. A former senior law enforcement official who spoke on condition of anonymity, citing fear of retaliation, said he was struck by the large amount of resources the DOJ put into investigating Abrego Garcia. 'It is odd that they would use all of these folks to go after a low-level driver,' said the official. 'Usually, we used the driver to go after the coyotes and up if we could. But they really wanted to get this guy and it looks like they found a path.' In a telephone interview with NBC News's Kristen Welker on Saturday, Trump hailed Abrego-Garcia's indictment and predicted it would be easy for federal prosecutors to convict him. 'I think it should be,' he said. 'It should be.' Multiple questions about Abrego-Garcia, the case against him, and the political fallout remain unanswered. Will Democrats pay a political price? For months, Abrego-Garcia's lawyers, his wife, and some Democrats, have denied that he was an MS-13 gang member. They generally portrayed him as a Maryland construction worker and claimed he was transporting co-workers when a Tennessee state trooper stopped him on Interstate 40 on November 30, 2022. The indictment paints a different picture: Abrego-Garcia was transporting nine Hispanic males without identification or luggage in a Chevrolet Suburban. Prosecutors allege he 'knowingly and falsely' told the trooper they 'had been in St. Louis for two weeks doing construction' and were returning to Maryland. However, license plate reader data showed that the Suburban had not been near St. Louis for twelve months. Instead, it had been in Houston where, according to prosecutors, Abrego-Garcia had picked up the men. The vehicle was not carrying tools or construction equipment, but its rear cargo area had been modified with makeshift seating to transport more passengers. The apparent strength of the government's case could reignite debate among Democrats about the risks of focusing on Abrego-Garcia's case. For weeks, Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland, and other Democrats emphasized that their criticism targeted Trump's decision to unilaterally deport Abrego-Garcia without judicial oversight, not a defense of Abrego Garcia himself. When Welker asked about Van Hollen, President Trump mocked the Senator and said defending the Abrego Garcia would backfire on Democrats. 'He's a loser. The guy's a loser,' Trump said, referring to Van Hollen. 'They're going to lose because of that same thing. That's not what people want to hear. He's trying to defend a man who's got a horrible record of abuse, abuse of women in particular.' Van Hollen defended his stance in a CNN interview. 'You know, I will never apologize for defending the Constitution,' he said. 'In fact, it's the Trump administration and all his cronies who should apologize to the country for putting us through this unnecessary situation.' What happened inside the Trump Administration? In an Oval Office visit on April 15, 2025, Trump, Attorney General Pam Bondi and other Trump administration officials asserted that it was not possible for the Trump administration to 'facilitate' the return of Abrego Garcia's return from El Salvador as the Supreme Court had ordered. El Salvador's President Nayib Bukele mocked areporter for asking whether he would do so.'How can I return him to the United States? Like if I smuggle him into the United States?' Bukele said, sitting beside Trump in the Oval Office. 'Of course I'm not going to do it. The question is preposterous.' Trump, in turn, chided the assembled journalists, saying, 'They'd love to have a criminal released into our country. These are sick people.' Bondi said only El Salvador could decide whether to return Bukele. 'If they want to return him, we would facilitate it, meaning provide a plane,' said Bondi said. 'That's up for El Salvador if they want to return him. That's not up to us.' Yet, in a Friday press conference at the Justice Department, Bondi described the return of Abrego-Garcia as smooth and seamless. 'We want to thank President Bukele for agreeing to return Abrego-Garcia to the United States,' she said. 'Our government presented El Salvador with an arrest warrant, and they agreed to return him to our country.' Asked what had changed since the traffic stop in 2022, she lauded Trump. 'What has changed is Donald Trump is now president of the United States,' Bondi said, 'and our borders are again secure.' In an unusual move, Bondi also described allegations against Abrego-Garcia that were not included in the indictment. She said that co-conspirators alleged that Abrego-Garcia 'solicited nude photographs and videos of a minor' and 'played a role in the murder of a rival gang member's mother.' For decades, attorneys general from both parties and state and local prosecutors have generally accused defendants of crimes only for which a grand jury indicted them. Discussing other potential crimes has long been regarded as an abuse of prosecutorial power, risking unfair harm to defendants' reputations. A former senior Justice Department official, who requested anonymity, citing fears of retaliation, said that Bondi often speaks as a partisan Trump loyalist, not a neutral law enforcement official. 'She says the president's name every time,' said the former DOJ official. 'She talks more like a politician, stumping for a candidate than an attorney general who is out there talking independently. You can see that in the words she uses.' Why did a top federal prosecutor in Tennessee resign? The Wall Street Journal reported on Friday that people close to the matter said the indictment prompted the resignation of a veteran career prosecutor who headed the criminal division at the U.S. attorney's office where the case was filed. The Journal did not name the prosecutor. However, days after Abrego-Garcia was indicted by a federal grand jury in Nashville, Ben Schrader, the head of criminal division in the U.S. Attorney's office in Nashville, resigned. 'Earlier today, after nearly 15 years as an Assistant United States Attorney, I resigned as Chief of the Criminal Division at the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Middle District of Tennessee,' Schrader posted on LinkedIn. 'It has been an incredible privilege to serve as a prosecutor with the Department of Justice, where the only job description I've ever known is to do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons. I wish all of my colleagues at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Nashville and across the Department the best as they seek to do justice on behalf of the American people.' :

As a former judge, I used to defend Britain's rights – mine are now at risk
As a former judge, I used to defend Britain's rights – mine are now at risk

The Independent

time2 days ago

  • The Independent

As a former judge, I used to defend Britain's rights – mine are now at risk

Before being a judge, I represented a rape victim who was deaf and unable to speak. She was so badly traumatised that, in a cry for help, she took a kitchen knife out in public and tried to kill herself. She was arrested and brought to court. She did not get bail. The probation officer – before even meeting me – told me she had decided to oppose bail. A cruel pre-judgment: custody would immediately end her job and change her life. Law has no feeling; it embodied the passive-aggression of society to disabled people and women: it processed her, like meat for dogs. Two weeks ago, the UN Special Procedures group – 19 specialists in fields including freedom of peaceful assembly and association, freedom of opinion and expression, and violence against women and girls – issued a statement of human rights concern about the UK, towards transsexual and other trans people. It came in response to the infamous, deeply confused decision of the UK Supreme Court in April in For Women Scotland, where trans people and the vast bulk of women and lesbians were not heard. We were judged by a court packed with non-trans pressure groups, and human rights were scarcely mentioned. In my opinion, the Supreme Court's decision forced on women the notion that they are inescapably defined by biology, presumably basic urges and wandering wombs, for sexual relationships, free association and equal rights. It reversed more than 20 years of peaceful co-existence between the trans community and others. The UK is beyond crisis: the economy is down, inflation is up; electricity and gas are unaffordable. Violence against women is up. Men are discarded, angry. Such a country becomes vulnerable to extremism and minority-blaming. In 2021, European parliament research revealed how foreign actors use media to stir LGBT+ hate. It is in Russia's interest to damage our social fabric, rendering us dysfunctional and divided, as there is evidence it did, too, with Brexit. This LGBT+ emergency is ripping apart tolerant British values. It follows the rise of the Gender Critical Ideology Movement (GCIM). I need not go into suggestions that GCIM is sometimes used as cover for people seeking LGBT+ conversion practices – or that some groups oppose banning conversion therapy towards trans people. Let us note, however, that GCIM did not seem to exist until around 2016, when UK-US movements arose preaching traditional sex roles. Let me concentrate on the immediate UK human crisis. The government ruled that people like me, previously legally female and (still!) having female anatomy, at risk of assault as with all women, must henceforth change in men's changing rooms, use men's loos in pubs and be excluded from female rape services. Despite my female birth certificate, I am apparently a 'man'. The EHRC followed suit. The police confirmed that people who are (or seem to be, one assumes) 'trans' shall be strip searched only by men, anatomy be damned. Such sexual assault of 'unfeminine' women may now be the law on the ground. Women with mastectomies are confronted, accused of 'transness'. Trans people not 'out' at work face disclosure of pariah status. Non-feminine women are confronted by other women in loos. A database has been proposed to enforce segregation. A fund has been created support civil legal enforcement of the new 'sex-based' rights. Wes Streeting, the health secretary, wants to segregate trans people in hospitals. Bridget Phillipson, our equalities minister, is MIA. I formed the Trans Exile Network for those leaving the UK now. Heterosexual families with kids, where, say, the husband is trans, have been re-designated as 'lesbian' because the court redefined 'lesbians' as well as 'women'. Nobody asked them, of course – unlike the 2004 Act, which was with national consent and consultation. Trans people are now two sexes at once: one for equalities law (I am now unable to claim equal pay rights as a woman) and one for everything else. Nobody at the top cares: it is 'clarification', says Keir Starmer, ignorantly. Now the GCIM want this rolled out across Europe. Next stop: Ireland. I've been contacted by suicidal people and the parents of kids who have been denied medical treatment. Parents fear for the future of their kids: if not helped now, they face forced puberty against their medical best interests and a harder life. Puberty delaying hormones are reversible and have been used upwards of 20 years to 'buy time' until kids are adults and can make decisions. The court must have assumed that the EHRC is neutral. More fool the court. But the biggest victim is our country – which I served as a judge for more than 18 years – and truth and humanity in public life.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store