In urging the justices to deny a stay of execution, Ken Paxton, Texas’ legal professional common, a Republican, mentioned Mr. Ramirez had engaged in litigation gamesmanship. For example, Mr. Paxton wrote, Mr. Ramirez had at one level requested solely that his pastor be current and needn’t contact him.
The Supreme Courtroom has taken quite a lot of approaches to fits wherein dying row inmates requested that their non secular advisers be current to consolation them throughout their executions,
In 2019, as an illustration, the courtroom allowed by a 5-to-4 vote the execution of an Alabama inmate, Domineque Ray, a Muslim whose request that his imam be current had been denied. On the time, Alabama allowed solely a Christian chaplain employed by the jail system to supply non secular steering to condemned inmates throughout their final moments.
Justice Elena Kagan, writing for the dissenters in 2019, mentioned the bulk was “profoundly mistaken.” Underneath Alabama’s coverage, she wrote, “a Christian prisoner could have a minister of his personal religion accompany him into the execution chamber to say his final rites.”
“But when an inmate practices a unique faith — whether or not Islam, Judaism or another — he could not die with a minister of his personal religion by his aspect,” Justice Kagan wrote.
A number of weeks later, the courtroom confronted an analogous case from Texas and got here to a unique conclusion, staying the execution of a Buddhist inmate whose request that his non secular adviser be current within the execution chamber had been denied.
In a brief, unsigned order, the courtroom mentioned that Texas couldn’t execute the inmate, Patrick H. Murphy, “except the state permits Murphy’s Buddhist non secular adviser or one other Buddhist reverend of the state’s selecting to accompany Murphy within the execution chamber in the course of the execution.”