Background of the Case

On the night of March 18, 2025, the Supreme Court ruled against a request for a stay of execution for Jessie Hoffman, who was executed by lethal injection in Louisiana. Hoffman’s death sentence stems from a brutal 1996 case involving the kidnapping, robbery, rape, and murder of Mary “Molly” Elliott.

Methods of Execution

Recently, Louisiana announced it would implement nitrogen hypoxia – a method involving the inhalation of nitrogen gas to induce asphyxiation – for future executions. This change became relevant for Hoffman when the state notified him, just ten days prior to his execution, about the intended method.

Legal Challenges

Hoffman contested this method in federal court, arguing it violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment and the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, which safeguards prisoners’ religious rights. As a practicing Buddhist, Hoffman claimed that nitrogen hypoxia would interfere with his meditative breathing practices at the time of his death.

Judicial Proceedings

A federal district court initially granted Hoffman’s request for a stay, suggesting that his arguments against nitrogen hypoxia had merit. However, this order was later reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, prompting Hoffman to approach the Supreme Court for intervention just days before his scheduled execution.

Supreme Court’s Ruling

In a brief, unsigned order, the Supreme Court denied Hoffman’s request, enabling the execution to proceed. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed their dissent by indicating they would have supported Hoffman’s application, though they did not elaborate on their reasoning.

Justice Neil Gorsuch provided a dissenting opinion regarding the majority’s decision. He noted that the district court’s dismissal of Hoffman’s religious claim was based on a flawed understanding of the sincerity of his beliefs, which, according to Gorsuch, should not be evaluated by the courts. He criticized the 5th Circuit’s failure to address this crucial aspect and asserted the Supreme Court’s limitations in analyzing the issue as a result.

Looking Ahead

The Supreme Court has not yet announced a schedule to review Hoffman’s petition for appeal. Should Hoffman be executed as planned, the petition will lapse as a non-active case.