US Supreme Court turns down SC inmate's appeal 1 day before execution
South Carolina's execution chamber. (Provided by the SC Department of Corrections)
COLUMBIA — The nation's highest court turned down a death row inmate's request to halt his execution Thursday, clearing the way for him to face the death chamber.
Marion Bowman, 44, is slated to die by lethal injection at 6 p.m. Friday. He was convicted in 2002 of shooting an Orangeburg mother to death, then stuffing her body in the trunk of her car and lighting it on fire.
Soon after the Supreme Court's ruling, a federal appeals court denied his request to know more about the drugs that will kill him, echoing a federal judge's ruling earlier this week.
In his appeal to the high court, Bowman's attorneys argued that his own defense attorney during his trial based his arguments on 'odious racial stereotypes' about Bowman, who is Black, and his victim, who was white.
Bowman's attorneys claimed that his initial defense team referred to Kandee Martin, the woman Bowman was convicted of killing, as a 'little white girl,' while calling Bowman a man, despite him being younger than her.
The appeal also argued Bowman's original attorney made comments suggesting that there was no reason Bowman would have been alone with Martin except to kill her, based on what his current attorneys argued was a racial stereotype.
Those quotes were taken out of context, attorneys for Department of Corrections Director Bryan Stirling argued in response. If Bowman had a problem with his attorney, he had more than 20 years to bring that up, the reply continued.
In a two-sentence order Thursday, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Stirling's arguments. No judges were noted as dissenting.
Following the federal appeals court's ruling, the only remaining way to halt Bowman's execution would be for Gov. Henry McMaster to grant him clemency. That's unlikely, considering McMaster, a former attorney general, has turned down requests for clemency for the past two inmates executed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Doechii Calls Out Trump Administration for ‘Creating Fear and Chaos' at L.A. Protests in BET Awards Speech
Doechii made the most of her first BET Award win on Monday night, telling an audience of honorees and attendees at the Peacock Theater that she felt a 'responsibility as an artist' to address the immigration protests and raids in Los Angeles. 'I do want to address what's happening right now, outside the building,' said Doechii, referring to the protests happening in Downtown Los Angeles, home of the Peacock Theater. 'These are ruthless attacks that are creating fear and chaos in our communities. In the name of law and order, Trump is using military forces to stop a protest, and I want you all to consider what kind of government it appears to be — when every time we exercise our democratic right to protest, the military is deployed against us.' More from Variety BET Awards Winners 2025 (Updating Live) Kendrick Lamar, Doechii and Drake Lead 2025 BET Award Nominations Kevin Hart to Host 2025 BET Awards California National Guard troops arrived in the city on Sunday in a show of force following division between immigration agents and protesters and amid a burgeoning fight between California and the Trump administration. Protests started on Friday after Immigration Customs Enforcement officers carried out raids in three locations across Los Angeles, where dozens of people were taken into custody, per NBC News. Doechii said she would use her voice to stand up for 'all oppressed people, for Black people, for Latino people, for trans people, for the people in Gaza.' She continued, 'What type of government is that? People are being swept up and torn from their families? We all deserve to live in hope and not in fear. And I hope we stand together my brothers and my sisters against hate and we protest against it.' Doechii won the award for best female hip-hop artist, a category that also recognized Cardi B, Doja Cat, Glorilla, Latto, Megan Thee Stallion, Nicki Minaj, Rapsody and Sexyy Red as nominees. Best of Variety 'Harry Potter' TV Show Cast Guide: Who's Who in Hogwarts? 25 Hollywood Legends Who Deserve an Honorary Oscar New Movies Out Now in Theaters: What to See This Week
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Meet the judge overseeing the Trump National Guard case: Justice Breyer's brother
Gov. Gavin Newsom's lawsuit against President Donald Trump over the deployment of the National Guard to Los Angeles is in the hands of a federal judge who is the younger brother of retired Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer. U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer, a former Watergate prosecutor nominated to the bench by Bill Clinton in 1997, was assigned to Newsom's case Tuesday, a day after California officials sued to reverse Trump's order. California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed the lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in San Francisco, citing the presence of his and other state offices in that city as justification for the choice of venue. Breyer is one of 13 judges in that courthouse and was assigned the case through a random process overseen by the court clerk. Breyer, who attended Harvard before getting his law degree from the University of California, Berkeley, was confirmed by unanimous consent in the Senate and has served as a judge in the San Francisco-based federal court since. Notably, Trump himself nominated Breyer in 2018 for a second term on the U.S. Sentencing Commission. Breyer, 83, will decide whether Trump had the legal authority to federalize 4,000 California National Guard troops amid street protests over the administration's immigration raids in Los Angeles. Newsom argues that the move was unlawful because Trump bypassed a requirement to coordinate with the governor's office and called up the troops over Newsom's objection. In a 2023 appearance at the Supreme Court alongside his brother, Breyer recalled that he was a local prosecutor during unrest in the Bay Area in the 1960s and 1970s but pressed on with his day-to-day work. 'I was an assistant district attorney. There were riots in San Francisco, over Vietnam over at San Francisco State, close it down,' Charles Breyer said. 'You did your task, which didn't mean that you weren't aware of what was going on or not sensitive to what was going on or tried to understand what was going on, but it meant you had a task.' In 2008, at a public talk alongside other former Watergate figures, Breyer said the Nixon-era scandal proved the value of the Constitution — and in particular, the First Amendment protections for those who 'speak out against the government.' 'We were told from Day One, why are you doing this? You're tearing down the presidency. You're making it very difficult for the president of the United States to discharge his obligations,' Breyer recalled. 'And our answer really was that the Constitution was set up … to allow an examination of the way our government operates. And that's what happened.'
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Paid insurrectionists': Amid unrest in L.A, Trump returns to an unsettling old favorite
Donald Trump was asked Tuesday whether he was prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act in response to protests in Los Angeles, and the president didn't rule out the possibility. Just as importantly, however, a reporter asked him how he would determine whether or not conditions warranted such a radical move. The Republican replied that he would 'take a look at what's happening,' which wasn't exactly reassuring. But before moving on, Trump blamed local unrest on 'paid insurrectionists.' He's been pushing the same line quite a bit in recent days. A day earlier, the president also told reporters: 'The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators.' Over the weekend, he also used his social media platform to complain about 'paid troublemakers' and 'paid insurrectionists.' If the line sounds familiar, it's not your imagination. As regular readers might recall, it was nearly nine years ago when Trump's 2016 candidacy inspired protests, at which point he assumed that the people involved couldn't possibly be sincere in their dislike of him. They were, he said at the time, 'paid agitators.' After he prevailed on Election Day 2016, there was related anti-Trump activism. Those involved, he said in November 2016, were 'paid protesters.' Months later, after his inauguration, the activism continued. Trump assured the public once more that these Americans deserved to be ignored — because, he assumed, they were 'paid protesters.' The following year, Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination inspired another round of progressive activism. The protesters, Trump insisted, were 'paid professionals.' Earlier this year, as congressional Republicans faced a public backlash, the president assured the public: 'Paid 'troublemakers' are attending Republican Town Hall Meetings.' For now, let's not dwell on the fact that Russia's Vladimir Putin has embraced the same tactic. Let's instead consider the unavoidable bottom line: For Trump and too many in his party, Americans who disagree with them are effectively an impossibility that can only be explained through corrupt schemes and illicit payments. Indeed, it's hardly a stretch to draw a straight line from 'paid protesters' rhetoric to election denialism: Americans who side with Trump and Republicans are real, while Americans who disagree must necessarily be seen as inauthentic. Whether the president is prepared to accept this or not, the fact remains that Americans who take to the streets to express their dissatisfaction with him don't need to be compensated: Their outrage is sincere. This post updates our related earlier coverage. This article was originally published on