Preface: A Letter Written from the Edge of Breath

0.0: Preface: A Letter Written from the Edge of Breath

I write to you as a man shaped by three inseparable callings: priest, scholar and witness, a triple vocation that has drawn me again and again into the horror chambers where the state takes human life. I write as someone who has held the hands of men who know they will never breathe again, studied the protocols meant to kill them and spoken truth in a world eager to pretend that such suffering does not exist. Each role informs the others. Each deepens the moral weight I carry. Each drives the urgency of telling what I have seen.

This book is born from those moments that cling to memory. Nitrogen hypoxia, the newest method of execution in the United States, was sold to the public as "humane," "clean," "quick" and even "painless." Those words are lies. I know because I stood there. I know because I heard the gas hiss, felt the trembling of a body fighting against death and saw the eyes that begged silently for mercy that would never come. I know because I have carried the visions into my sleep, where they do not rest, where Kenny's chest heaves, where Anthony's legs jerk and where the sterile white walls of the chamber have become the walls of my own nightmares.

This is not merely memoir. It is not simply theology. It is scholarship. It is witness. It is intervention. And it is my refusal to let the state erase these men's lives and their deaths.

Above all, I write for one purpose: to stop further nitrogen executions by telling the whole nitrogen story without restraint.

I. The First Experiment: The Death of Kenneth Eugene Smith

When Alabama executed Kenneth Eugene Smith on January 25, 2024, the state introduced a new kind of horror. Legislators called it science; courts called it humane; officials called it careful. But the moment I entered the chamber at Holman Prison, all those euphemisms evaporated. What remained was a man strapped to a gurney, fitted with an industrial respirator mask that was never intended for death and the metallic scent of sterility that mixed tangibly with terror.

As a priest, my role was to hold him, to bear witness to the humanity the state attempted to erase. As a scholar, my role was to record, to analyze. As a witness, my role was to see clearly---and refuse to believe the lies.

When the nitrogen began to flow, Kenny's body convulsed violently. His chest heaved violently. His head jerked upward repeatedly, a silent scream trapped behind the mask. His legs strained against the restraints in defiance. His body shook with enough force to make the gurney itself tremble.

This was not peaceful. This was not painless. This was suffocation.

I remember the way the shadows stretched across the white walls, throwing grotesque reflections of a man fighting against a horror that would not yield. Every nerve in my body screamed for me to intervene. But I could do nothing. I could only watch.

And when I left that night, the images stayed with me. Kenny's eyes, wide and searching for any small amount of air that would never come, haunted me. They followed me into sleep, into prayer, into my every waking thought.

II. The Execution of Anthony Boyd: Horror Repeated

I prayed that Kenny's death would be the last nitrogen execution I would ever see. But Anthony Boyd asked for my help, and I agreed to accompany him to his nitrogen execution. And it was worse. Because the state had learned nothing---and horror became repetition---and repetition became inevitability.

Anthony and I prayed together, read scripture and spoke of hope. But in his eyes was a fear of what was coming, a knowledge I'd already seen before.

When the nitrogen flowed, the same pattern emerged, but with a clarity that was more terrifying than the first. His body jerked and twitched. His chest rose and fell in ragged waves. His legs lifted against the restraints. His hands clutched at nothing, grasping the invisible hope of air. The room seemed to shrink around him. The white walls reflected every movement, every gasping sound, magnifying them in a chorus of helplessness.

As a priest, I felt helpless, the presence of God seemed suspended somewhere outside the room. As a scholar, I recorded every motion, every convulsion and every violation of the state's promises. As a witness, I screamed in silence, furious that a civilized society could sanction this spectacle and call it humane.

Anthony's death was not only a personal nightmare; it was a mirror of our collective one. And it continues to follow me into my dreams. The memory of his legs rising and falling, his chest heaving, his hands clawing at straps---these are images that cannot be forgotten. They are etched into consciousness like a wound that will never heal.

III. The Triple Vocation: Priest, Scholar and Witness

To experience these deaths is to inhabit three roles at once:

1. The Priest: I must be present, tender and unflinching. I hold hands that will never grasp again. I hear confessions. I offer absolution. I celebrate the Eucharist. I behold the human dignity that persists even under the most brutal conditions.

2. The Scholar: I must record, analyze and bear evidence. Agonal respirations. Reflexive movements. Leg lifts. Chest heaves. These are not abstract. They are proof against the state's narrative. Every detail matters, because each is a fact that contradicts "humane," "quick" and "painless."

3. The Witness: I must speak truth to a society that prefers silence. I must name the horror, even when it is hidden behind walls, masks and protocols. I must refuse the euphemisms and the lies and insist that the world see what is being done in its name.

The priest sees the suffering. The scholar describes the suffering. The witness exposes the suffering.

Alone, none is sufficient. Together, they confront the full horror of state-sanctioned death. I employ all three to write this comprehensive historical and experiential description and analysis of nitrogen executions.

IV. Reflection: Horror, Nightmares, and Memory

Witnessing nitrogen hypoxia is a psychological crucible. The horror does not end with the last breath. It follows, uninvited, into sleep and prayer. I wake to the sensation of air being pulled from my own lungs. In dreams, gurneys tilt, straps fail, masks shift and men I have accompanied flail and gasp again. The fluorescent lights flicker. The hiss of nitrogen becomes a scream I cannot locate.

This is not metaphor. It is memory. It is trauma.

Ethically, this method is indefensible. The state claims detachment; it claims scientific rigor; it claims humanity. But the visible suffering---jerking limbs, heaving chests, eyes wide with panic---demands another truth. Theologically, it is a crisis. The mask hides the most human of experiences: fear, panic and the struggle to survive. Academically, it is an empirical contradiction to every claim of humane death. Socially, it is a mirror held to a nation willing to hide violence from itself.

The nightmares are not only personal. They are societal. Each death is a warning the public refuses to hear, a moral wound ignored and a consequence of the indifference we have toward the suffering of others.

V. Why This Book Exists: A Call to Witness

Neutrality is impossible. Silence is complicity. Every page of this book is a refusal to forget, a refusal to allow the state to sanitize death. Courts, legislatures and the public may obscure, dismiss or rationalize nitrogen hypoxia, but I cannot. I have seen too much.

To the skeptical reader: You may support capital punishment. You may believe that some crimes warrant death. You may trust that the state, having abandoned other methods, has finally found a humane alternative in nitrogen hypoxia. You may think that my role as a minister has clouded my judgment, that my opposition to execution has predetermined my conclusions.

I ask only this: Read what follows with the same standard you would demand in any other context.

If the state claims nitrogen hypoxia is "painless," but there is documentation of violent convulsions lasting minutes, weigh the evidence. If officials promise it is "quick," but there is documentation of the precise duration of visible suffering, check the timeline. If they assert it is "humane," but men's bodies arch against heaving and slam against restraints with such force that gurneys shake, ask yourself what that word means.

I did not enter those chambers expecting to witness torture. I entered hoping the state's promises were true: that if execution must happen, it could at least be without prolonged suffering. What I saw shattered those hopes.

The details in this book are not interpretations. They are observations. The medical terminology is not rhetoric. It is documentation. The legal analysis is not advocacy. It is examination of what courts permitted despite clear evidence of harm. And these details come from a wide variety of sources.

You may finish this book still supporting capital punishment in theory. But I challenge you to finish it still believing nitrogen hypoxia is humane in practice. The bodies I and many others have watched do not lie. The gasps I and many other have heard cannot be explained away. The science simply does not support the claims of "humaneness" made by government officials.

Read the testimony. Examine the evidence. Then decide for yourself whether if what I and others have witnessed matches what you were told.

VI. The Direction

This book is a priest's testimony, a scholar's record and a witness's warning. It is a documentation of horror, a theological reflection on ritualized violence and a moral argument that no method of killing can be "humane" when the body convulses and suffocation is forced.

In the chapters that follow, I will take you inside each nitrogen execution---what the law permitted, what the medical evidence reveals and what the state concealed. Personal testimony. Legal documentation. Scholarly analysis. Each execution examined through the lens of priest, scholar and witness. Each death a case study in state-sanctioned violence, state-sanctioned suffocation.

VII. A Promise to the Living and the Dead

After Anthony Boyd's execution, I stepped into the night air. For a moment, I simply breathed. For a moment, I allowed myself the privilege of air he would never again know.

And in that moment, I made a promise---to Kenny, to Anthony, to the six others who have died as they did, to those the state intends to kill next: I will not let your story be hidden. I will carry the truth about nitrogen suffocation---nitrogen hypoxia---into the conscience of the living.

May these pages disturb the conscience. May they unveil what has been masked. May they interrupt the machinery of death. May they bring nitrogen hypoxia to an end before another man is strapped down, fitted with a respirator and suffocated in the name of justice.

What follows is the full account: execution by execution, breath by breath, judgment by judgment. Beginning with Kenneth Eugene Smith on January 25, 2024, and the night Alabama introduced nitrogen hypoxia to the world.

With grief, with conviction and with the memory of the last breaths I've witnessed,

Jeff Hood
New York, New York
November 17, 2025

0.01: Preface to the Second Edition: The Year a Court Finally Looked

When I finished the first edition of this book, I believed I had written an ending. I had not. I had written a warning. The first edition told the story of a method of execution that was sold to the public as humane and proved, in chamber after chamber, to be suffocation. It told that story to its last page and then stopped at the only place the facts allowed...uncertainty. Eight men were dead. The courts had let every one of those deaths proceed. And nothing in the law, as it then stood, suggested a ninth would be any different.

Then came June of 2026, and a man named Jeffery Lee. For the first time in the history of this method, a court was made to sit through a full trial and look...really look...at what nitrogen does to a conscious human being. I had begged for that for two years. I had written it, preached it, testified to it and carried it into my sleep. And when a court finally looked, it saw what I saw. It called the method cruel. It called the suffering intolerable. It entered the first permanent injunction in American history against a way of killing, and the Supreme Court let that injunction stand. Jeffery Lee did not die in that chamber. He is the reason this second edition exists.

This edition does not erase a word of the first. The deaths are still here. The lies are still named. What I have added is the story the first edition could not tell because it had not yet happened---the trial, the reversal, the injunction, the silence of the Supreme Court, and a full accounting of the judges who, across two years and one decisive month, argued over whether this country may suffocate the people it condemns. I have rewritten the conclusion to say what is now true. I have added a new postface. And I have left the original preface and postface exactly as they were, because they were honest when I wrote them, and I will not pretend I knew then what I know now.

I remain what I was when I began---priest, scholar and witness. As a priest I accompanied men to these deaths and held what the state tried to erase. As a scholar I recorded what I saw against the day a court would finally weigh it. As a witness I refused the lie. This edition is the first time those three callings have been met, in part, by the law itself. The record I kept became, in a courtroom in Montgomery, the finding of a court. That is not a small thing. For two years the truth of these executions lived only in the testimony of those of us who watched. Now it lives in a judgment.

But I will not let you read these new chapters as a victory and close the book. Nitrogen is wounded...it is not gone. The statutes remain on the books in five states. The masks remain in their cases. A court has called this method probably unconstitutional, and it would be insane for any state to reach for it again---and yet power has done insane things before, when no one was watching. So read this edition as I have written it...not as an ending, but as the moment the tide turned, and a summons to make certain it does not turn back. The eight will be the last only if we make them the last.

What follows is the whole nitrogen story, told now through to the first verdict against it. I have tried, as I always try, to bring you as close to the chamber as words allow---to let you stand where I have stood, hear what I have heard, and refuse, as I have refused, to look away. The first edition asked you to witness. This one asks you to witness, and then to guard what witness has won.

Jeff Hood

North Little Rock, Arkansas

Summer 2026

0.1: The Search for a "Fool-Proof" Solution: Oklahoma Unleashes Nitrogen Hypoxia

I. A Crisis of Confidence

In early 2015, the legislature of Oklahoma confronted a critical moment in the administration of capital punishment. Less than a year earlier, on April 29, 2014, the execution of Clayton Lockett had devolved into a botched procedure that would shake public confidence in the state's ability to carry out the death penalty humanely. Lockett writhed, groaned and attempted to lift himself from the gurney for over forty minutes before finally dying, after the lethal-injection drugs failed to work as intended.¹ What was supposed to be a clinical, controlled procedure had instead become a spectacle of visible suffering that many witnesses found deeply disturbing.

This public disaster and the legal fallout that followed galvanized lawmakers to search for an alternative method of execution that could avoid similar failures. The widespread media coverage transformed what might have been a local issue into a national debate about the viability of capital punishment itself. News outlets across the country ran stories questioning whether any execution method could be reliably humane. Legal challenges multiplied. The urgency became palpable. If lethal injection could no longer reliably produce death without visible suffering, the state faced both practical and ethical crises that threatened to undermine the entire system of capital punishment in Oklahoma.

The political pressure was immense. Supporters of the death penalty worried that continued failures would lead to judicial intervention or legislative abolition. Opponents seized on the Lockett execution as evidence that capital punishment was inherently flawed. In this charged atmosphere, state legislators felt compelled to act quickly to restore public confidence and demonstrate that they could find a workable solution.

Seeking an alternative to the failing lethal-injection regime, the legislature turned to a novel method: inert-gas hypoxia using nitrogen. Representative Mike Christian, one of the chief proponents of the new approach, described nitrogen hypoxia with remarkable confidence: "One, it's practical. Two, it's efficient. Three, it's humane. And it's innovative."² To underscore his confidence, Christian repeatedly framed the method as "fool-proof,"³ suggesting that no human error or logistical complication could undermine the process. This rhetorical choice was significant: By calling it fool-proof, Christian was essentially promising that Oklahoma had found the answer to all the problems that had plagued previous execution methods.

The simplicity of the logic seemed compelling on its surface: displace oxygen with nitrogen gas, induce unconsciousness quickly and achieve death without the complications that had made lethal injection so problematic. In Christian's view, nitrogen hypoxia could sidestep the logistical, legal and ethical pitfalls that had plagued lethal injection in Oklahoma and elsewhere.⁴ There would be no need for elusive drugs, no concerns about medical personnel administering chemicals and no risk of the kind of vein-access problems that had contributed to Lockett's prolonged death.

II. The Promise of Simplicity

The rationale for nitrogen hypoxia was grounded in physiological theory that initially appeared straightforward and scientifically sound. The basic premise was that breathing pure nitrogen would displace oxygen in the lungs, leading to hypoxia-induced unconsciousness without triggering the panic responses that conventional suffocation produces.⁵ This distinction was crucial to the argument for humaneness. When someone cannot breathe normally, carbon dioxide builds up in the bloodstream, triggering an intense physiological alarm: the sensation of suffocating, gasping for air and overwhelming panic. This is what makes drowning or strangulation so terrifying.

Proponents argued that nitrogen hypoxia would be fundamentally different. Because nitrogen is an inert gas that the body doesn't register as dangerous, and because it doesn't cause CO₂ buildup, the person would simply lose consciousness peacefully, almost as if falling asleep. Senator Ervin Yen, who brought valuable medical credentials to the debate as a cardiac anesthesiologist, assured lawmakers that nitrogen hypoxia avoided CO₂ buildup (which typically triggers distress), hyperventilation and panic during respiratory failure.⁶ His medical authority lent significant weight to the argument. Here was a trained physician explaining that the science was solid.

For proponents, this made nitrogen hypoxia a method that could survive scrutiny under the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Christian further argued that nitrogen solved both the dwindling availability of lethal injection drugs---pharmaceutical companies had increasingly refused to sell drugs for executions---and the risk of botched executions like Lockett's.⁷ It seemed like a practical solution to multiple problems at once. The gas was readily available, inexpensive and required no medical expertise to administer. What could go wrong?

The theoretical appeal was powerful. Unlike lethal injection (which required obtaining specific drugs, training personnel to establish IV lines and monitoring the administration of a three-drug cocktail) nitrogen hypoxia seemed refreshingly simple. Place a mask over the condemned person's face, turn on the nitrogen flow and wait. The gas would do the rest. This simplicity was presented not just as a practical advantage but as evidence of the method's reliability.

III. Dissenting Voices and Ethical Concerns

Not all lawmakers were persuaded by these arguments. Some expressed ethical discomfort that cut to the heart of the debate, noting that the search for new ways to kill people posed a moral question that went beyond technical arguments about what would or wouldn't work.⁸ The objections raised a question that made some legislators uncomfortable: Should the state be innovating in methods of execution at all? Was this the kind of problem solving that government should be engaged in?

Legal scholars watching the Oklahoma debate also raised red flags. Deborah W. Denno, a prominent expert on execution methods, described nitrogen hypoxia as "experimental," highlighting three critical problems: the absence of any human trials, a vague execution protocol that left crucial details undefined and the impossibility of confirming whether the method actually produced the effects proponents claimed.⁹ How could Oklahoma be so confident about a method that had never been tested on humans?

Michael Copeland, a legislative researcher who produced a report supporting nitrogen hypoxia, claiming, we can have 100% confidence in what happens when a person doesn't breathe oxygen.¹⁰ This absolute certainty was striking, given that his conclusions relied heavily on analogies to pilots experiencing oxygen deprivation and victims of auto accidents involving nitrogen leaks, rather than controlled human studies conducted under conditions similar to an execution.¹¹ These comparisons were problematic because they involved different circumstances: Pilots typically lose consciousness gradually at high altitude, and accident victims are not strapped down, conscious and anticipating their death.

Perhaps most troubling, industrial gas suppliers, independent anesthesiologists not employed by the state, and ethicists who specialized in medical experimentation were notably absent from legislative hearings.¹² The debate was largely conducted among lawmakers and a small circle of supporters, without the kind of external expert scrutiny that such a significant policy change would normally warrant. This insular process meant that critical practical and ethical considerations were either not raised or not adequately examined. Questions about mask design, flow rates, backup procedures and monitoring protocols were left largely unaddressed.

IV. Legislative Passage and Political Strategy

Despite these criticisms, the bill moved through the legislature with remarkable speed and overwhelming support. The House approved it by a vote of 85-10 and the Senate passed it by a unanimous vote of 41-0.¹³ These lopsided votes reflected the political reality in Oklahoma, where support for capital punishment remained strong and the Lockett execution had created pressure to demonstrate that the state could execute people without the kind of chaos that had occurred. Governor Mary Fallin signed the measure into law on April 17, 2015, less than a year after the Lockett execution.¹⁴

Fallin praised the law as providing "another death penalty option that meets the standard."¹⁵ Her statement was carefully worded: Nitrogen hypoxia wasn't replacing lethal injection, but supplementing it. The law designated nitrogen hypoxia as a backup method, only to be invoked if lethal injection became unavailable or was ruled unconstitutional.¹⁶ This strategic positioning allowed supporters to argue they were simply adding options---not abandoning a method that, despite its problems, had been used successfully in other cases.

This legislative process reflected the intersection of urgency, political alignment and confidence in the theoretical simplicity of the method.¹⁷ Legislators were responding to what they perceived as a crisis, and they found a solution that fit their needs. It was novel enough to demonstrate action, simple enough to seem reliable, and untested enough that no evidence existed of it failing. The political calculus was clear: Doing nothing wasn't an option, and nitrogen hypoxia offered a path forward that could command broad support.

Legislators framed nitrogen hypoxia as a solution to multiple interconnected problems: drug shortages that threatened to make lethal injection impossible, legal challenges that questioned the constitutionality of current methods and erosion of public trust following the Lockett execution.¹⁸ In selling the proposal, supporters emphasized its advantages and minimized concerns, while dissenting voices were marginalized in the rush to pass legislation.¹⁹ The few legislators who expressed reservations were portrayed as soft on crime or as obstructing necessary reforms.

The speed of the process is worth emphasizing. From introduction to passage took only weeks. There were no extended committee hearings with expert witnesses from outside Oklahoma. There was no pilot program or feasibility study. There was no consultation with states that might have considered similar methods. The legislature essentially endorsed a theoretical approach based on limited information and immense political pressure to act.

V. Historical Context of Execution Methods

To fully understand Oklahoma's embrace of nitrogen hypoxia, the method must be situated within the broader trajectory of American execution practices. The United States has repeatedly attempted to reconcile public expectations of retribution and justice with constitutional limits on cruel and unusual punishment. This tension has driven a long history of searching for ever more humane methods of execution, each new approach promising to solve the problems of its predecessor.

Methods evolved from hanging to the electric chair, then to gas chambers and finally to lethal injection. Each transition responded to specific crises: technical failures that produced horrific scenes, public scrutiny that made current methods untenable or practical obstacles like drug shortages.²⁰ The pattern is remarkably consistent. A method fails or becomes problematic, pressure builds for reform and a new method is adopted with promises that it will be more humane and reliable.

Introduced in the late 19th century, the electric chair was intended as a more humane alternative to hanging, which could result in slow strangulation if the drop didn't break the neck or decapitation if the rope was too long.²¹ Early advocates of electrocution argued it would be instantaneous and painless, with death occurring before the condemned person could register any sensation. In practice, the electric chair frequently caused burning, convulsions and prolonged suffering.²² Witnesses described smoke rising from bodies, the smell of burning flesh and inmates who remained conscious through multiple jolts of electricity. Some executions required repeated attempts when the equipment malfunctioned or was improperly calibrated.

Adopted by several states in the 20th century, the gas chamber was promoted as an improvement over electrocution. It sought to reduce the visible violence of execution by using poison gas, typically hydrogen cyanide, to kill quickly and supposedly painlessly.²³ But gas chambers produced their own horrors. Inmates would gasp and struggle as carbon dioxide accumulated in their lungs, creating the sensation of suffocation. The process could take many minutes---with witnesses reporting that condemned prisoners held their breath, fought against their restraints and showed obvious signs of distress. The gas chamber eventually fell out of favor as evidence mounted that it was neither quick nor painless.

Lethal injection emerged in the 1970s as the next promised solution. It was designed to look medical and clinical, to resemble a hospital procedure rather than an execution. Proponents argued it would be the most humane method yet devised, a quick series of drug injections that would cause unconsciousness, paralysis and then death. For several decades, lethal injection was widely accepted as the best available option. But over time, problems accumulated. There has been difficulty obtaining drugs as pharmaceutical companies have withdrawn from the execution business, questions about whether paralytic drugs masked suffering and a series of botched executions that revealed the method's vulnerabilities.

These historical precedents illustrate a recurring gap between theoretical promise and operational reality. Each method looked good on paper. Each was adopted with confidence that science and expertise would ensure humane results. And each eventually revealed unexpected complications and failures.²⁴ Nitrogen hypoxia, adopted with minimal empirical testing, mirrored these prior assumptions: that scientific theory alone could ensure humane execution---without the need for extensive testing or the possibility of unforeseen problems.²⁵

The Oklahoma legislature, in its rush to find an alternative after the Lockett execution, was essentially repeating this historical pattern. Lawmakers were convinced that nitrogen hypoxia would be different, that this time they had found a truly fool-proof method. They appeared to have learned little from the history of previous execution methods, each of which had been introduced with similar confidence.

VI. Medical and Physiological Considerations

Medical professionals played a surprisingly limited role in shaping Oklahoma's legislation, largely due to ethical prohibitions against physician involvement in executions.²⁶ The American Medical Association and other professional organizations have long maintained that physician participation in executions violates medical ethics, which prioritize healing and the preservation of life. This creates a paradox. The state needs medical expertise to design and implement execution methods that are allegedly humane, but the medical professionals with the necessary knowledge are ethically barred from participating.

The lack of independent clinical oversight meant that assumptions about safety and humaneness relied on untested physiological theory rather than empirical evidence from actual cases. Lawmakers and their staff researchers were making judgments about complex physiological processes without the kind of rigorous study that would be required for any new medical procedure. If nitrogen hypoxia were being proposed as a method of euthanasia for medical purposes, it would require extensive animal studies, then carefully monitored human trials with full informed consent, oversight by ethics boards and years of data collection. None of that occurred in the context of executions.

Studies that did exist indicated potential problems with the assumptions underlying nitrogen hypoxia. Research on mammals showed that hypoxia could induce panic and involuntary movements even under environments rich with nitrogen.²⁷ Animals deprived of oxygen didn't simply lose consciousness peacefully; they often exhibited distress behaviors, struggled and experienced physiological responses that suggest extreme discomfort or suffering. While animal studies can't perfectly predict human responses, they should have raised questions about the confident assertions being made.

Subsequent use of the method would reveal that humans could experience negative pressure pulmonary edema---a condition where fluid accumulates in the lungs---along with convulsions and visible distress, despite prior assumptions of a painless death.²⁸ These complications weren't discussed during the Oklahoma legislative debates because the theoretical model being used didn't predict them. The gap between theory and reality turned out to be substantial.

The physiological reality is more complex than proponents acknowledge. When the body is suddenly deprived of oxygen, multiple systems respond in ways that aren't fully understood or predictable. The brain doesn't simply shut down cleanly. Blood pressure can spike. Muscle control can be lost, leading to convulsions. The cardiovascular system may struggle to compensate. And the subjective experience---what the condemned person actually feels and perceives---remains unknowable because we cannot ask them afterward.

VII. Implementation Challenges and Supplier Resistance

Beyond the scientific and medical questions, the practical implementation of nitrogen hypoxia faced significant logistical obstacles that received little attention during the legislative debates. One of the most serious problems emerged after the law was passed: Major industrial gas suppliers refused to provide nitrogen for executions, fundamentally undermining one of the method's key operational assumptions.²⁹

Companies that manufacture and distribute industrial gases wanted no association with executions. This wasn't just about public relations; many companies have explicit policies against allowing their products to be used to take human life. Oklahoma and other states that adopted nitrogen hypoxia assumed they would be able to simply purchase medical-grade or industrial nitrogen through normal commercial channels. When suppliers refused to sell for execution purposes, states were forced to seek alternative sources, raising questions about gas purity and quality control.

Combined with the absence of medical oversight, the state had to rely on personnel without medical training to administer a procedure with significant physiological risks.³⁰ This created additional vulnerabilities. Who would monitor the condemned person during the procedure? How would officials know when death had occurred? What would happen if the mask didn't seal properly, or if the person resisted breathing, or if the flow rate was incorrect? These practical questions were never satisfactorily answered.

The execution protocol that eventually emerged was developed largely by corrections officials and lawyers---not by medical professionals or physiologists. This meant that crucial decisions about equipment, procedures and monitoring were being made by people who lacked the technical expertise to fully understand the implications. It was a recipe for disaster.

VIII. The Reality of Execution

The theoretical promise of nitrogen hypoxia collided with reality on January 25, 2024, when Kenneth Eugene Smith became the first person in the United States executed using this method in Alabama (unsurprisingly, Oklahoma ultimately decided not to use the method it had pioneered).³¹ State officials had assured both the public and the courts that unconsciousness would occur within seconds, with death following quickly and painlessly. Witnesses would see nothing disturbing and the condemned man would lose consciousness so rapidly that he would experience no suffering.

The actual execution told a very different story. Witnesses reported that Smith remained conscious for several minutes, his body convulsing as he gasped desperately for air and retched repeatedly.³² This was not the peaceful, rapid loss of consciousness that had been promised. Smith appeared to be struggling and in distress, his physical reactions suggesting exactly the kind of suffering that nitrogen hypoxia was supposed to prevent. The scene was disturbingly reminiscent of the gas chamber executions that had been abandoned decades earlier as inhumane.

The autopsy revealed pulmonary edema and significant fluid in Smith's lungs, directly contradicting the prior theoretical assurances that nitrogen hypoxia would be a clean, complication-free process.³³ The presence of fluid in the lungs suggested that Smith's body had undergone a traumatic physiological response to oxygen deprivation. This wasn't simply falling asleep; it was a violent bodily struggle against suffocation.

Subsequent executions in Alabama and Louisiana between 2024 and 2025 replicated this disturbing pattern: extended periods of consciousness, violent bodily reactions and observable signs of distress.³⁴ Each execution provided more evidence that nitrogen hypoxia did not work as its proponents had confidently predicted. The "fool-proof" method turned out to have significant problems that should have been anticipated if proper testing and expert consultation had occurred.

Witnesses to these executions described scenes that were difficult to watch. Some reported that the condemned individuals appeared to be fighting to breathe. Others described the condemned thrashing against the restraints. Still others noted that the process took far longer than officials had suggested, with consciousness persisting well beyond the promised timeframe. These observations were consistent across multiple executions and suggested systematic problems with the method rather than isolated incidents or implementation errors.

IX. Legal and Human-Rights Implications

The extended suffering visible during nitrogen hypoxia executions raises serious Eighth Amendment concerns under the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. The Supreme Court has established that execution methods cannot pose a substantial risk of serious harm---meaning they must be reasonably certain to produce death without unnecessary pain or suffering.³⁵ When witnesses consistently report signs of distress, when autopsies reveal physiological trauma and when the process takes much longer than promised, courts must consider whether the method meets constitutional standards.

Legal challenges to nitrogen hypoxia have focused on several key issues. First, the lack of any human trials or empirical testing before implementation means the method was essentially an experiment conducted on condemned prisoners without their informed consent. Second, the visible suffering during actual executions suggests that the method does pose substantial risks of serious harm. Third, the absence of medical oversight and the inability of corrections officials to properly monitor and respond to complications raises questions about whether states can reliably implement the method in a constitutional manner.

International bodies have taken note as well. United Nations human rights experts have described nitrogen gas executions as potentially constituting torturous, cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment under international law.³⁶ While the United States is not bound by all international human rights conventions, these international perspectives add to the growing consensus that nitrogen hypoxia is deeply problematic.

The lack of medical oversight and the absence of prior human trials further exacerbate these legal and ethical vulnerabilities.³⁷ Courts considering challenges to nitrogen hypoxia must weigh states' assertions that the method is humane against evidence from actual executions showing something quite different. The gap between promise and reality is precisely the kind of problem that should trigger heightened judicial scrutiny.

Defense attorneys representing condemned prisoners slated for nitrogen hypoxia execution have argued that their clients are being subjected to an experimental procedure that violates their constitutional rights. These legal challenges have had mixed success, with some courts expressing concern about the method while others have deferred to state officials' expertise and judgments. The legal landscape remains unsettled---with additional challenges likely as more executions occur and more evidence accumulates.

X. Policy Analysis and Institutional Lessons

Oklahoma's adoption of nitrogen hypoxia offers important lessons in policymaking under conditions of urgency and political pressure. The state's experience demonstrates how reliance on theoretical simplicity over empirical validation can create policies that are vulnerable to operational failure and legal challenge.³⁸ When lawmakers convinced themselves that the science was simple and straightforward, they short-circuited the kind of careful analysis and testing that should precede any significant policy innovation, especially one involving matters of life and death.

The legislative process revealed several institutional failures. First, lawmakers gave too much weight to confident assertions from supporters while dismissing or ignoring skeptical voices. The political pressure to act quickly overwhelmed normal deliberative processes. Second, the absence of independent expert review meant that crucial questions were never properly examined. Third, the insular nature of the debate---conducted largely among Oklahoma lawmakers and their staff rather than with input from outside experts---meant that important perspectives and concerns were not adequately considered.

Historical precedent from previous execution methods suggests that all new techniques require rigorous testing, monitoring and refinement before they can be implemented reliably and humanely.³⁹ Oklahoma's quick adoption of nitrogen hypoxia demonstrates what happens when these steps are skipped. The state accepted a method based largely on theoretical models and confident assertions, only to see those assumptions contradicted when the method was actually used.

The institutional lesson is clear: Crisis conditions and political urgency are precisely the circumstances under which careful deliberation is most important, not least important. When lawmakers feel pressure to act quickly, they need to resist the temptation to embrace solutions that seem simple and appealing without subjecting them to rigorous scrutiny. The death penalty---whatever one's views on its legitimacy---is serious enough to warrant the most careful policymaking possible.

The state's experience also demonstrates the persistent tension between theoretical promise and real-world outcomes in capital punishment.⁴⁰ This tension has characterized every execution method adopted in American history. Nitrogen hypoxia is simply the latest example. Lawmakers keep believing that science and expertise can produce a truly humane method of execution, but the reality keeps proving more complicated and troubling than the theory suggests.

XI. Ethical Reflections and Future Considerations

Beyond the legal and technical issues, the adoption of nitrogen hypoxia raises profound ethical questions that extend well beyond Oklahoma's borders. The use of untested methods on human beings, even those convicted of terrible crimes, engages fundamental concerns about consent, informed risk and state-sanctioned experimentation.⁴¹ When the state executes someone using a method that has never been properly tested, it is essentially conducting an experiment on a captive subject who cannot consent and who has no ability to refuse participation.

This raises uncomfortable parallels to unethical medical experiments conducted on prisoners in the past. While the state would argue that execution itself is the punishment---not the method used---there is something troubling about using condemned prisoners as test subjects for new execution techniques. The fact that these individuals have been sentenced to death does not eliminate all ethical obligations the state owes them, including the obligation not to subject them to unnecessary suffering or to use them as experimental subjects.

The assumption that simplicity ensures humaneness is contradicted by repeated evidence that physiological complexity defies easy management in execution contexts. The human body and brain are extraordinarily complex systems that respond to oxygen deprivation in ways that aren't fully understood and certainly aren't perfectly predictable. The idea that simply replacing oxygen with nitrogen would produce a quick, peaceful death turned out to be based on an oversimplified understanding of human physiology.

There are also questions about what Oklahoma's experience says about the death penalty more broadly. If the state cannot find a method of execution that reliably produces death without visible suffering, despite repeated attempts over more than a century, perhaps this suggests something fundamental about the project itself. Each new method has been presented as the solution---and each has eventually revealed serious problems. At some point, the pattern itself becomes significant.

Looking forward, states that have adopted nitrogen hypoxia face difficult choices. They can proceed with a method that has demonstrated serious problems in actual use. They can seek to refine the method through additional testing and protocol development. Or they can reconsider whether nitrogen hypoxia should be used at all. Each option presents challenges. Proceeding despite evidence of problems risks additional botched executions and legal challenges. Attempting to refine the method raises the question of how such testing could be conducted ethically. And abandoning nitrogen hypoxia would mean acknowledging that the confident promises made during adoption were mistaken.

XII. "Fool-Proof"

Oklahoma's pursuit of a "fool-proof" execution method demonstrates the perils of legislating under conditions of crisis and theoretical optimism. The story of nitrogen hypoxia's adoption reveals how political pressure, overconfidence in simple scientific theories and the absence of rigorous expert scrutiny can produce policies that fail when implemented. The gap between what was promised and what actually occurred in nitrogen hypoxia executions is substantial and troubling.

Evidence from subsequent executions shows clearly that nitrogen hypoxia fails to meet the promised standards of humaneness and reliability that justified its adoption.⁴² Witness accounts describing extended consciousness and physical distress, autopsy reports revealing pulmonary edema and physiological trauma and statements from international human rights bodies collectively indicate that assumptions about simplicity and reliability cannot replace rigorous testing and ongoing oversight.

The Oklahoma case stands as a cautionary tale about the dangers of policy innovation without adequate preparation and study. It demonstrates that untested innovation in capital punishment carries profound ethical, legal and human consequences.⁴³ When the state takes on the grave responsibility of deliberately ending human life, it cannot rely on theoretical models and confident assertions. The reality is always more complex, more troubling and more difficult than the theory suggests.

For Oklahoma specifically, the irony is sharp: After pioneering nitrogen hypoxia legislation, the state watched as Alabama and Louisiana became the testing grounds for the method, revealing all the problems that skeptics had warned about. Governor Kevin Stitt announced in January 2024 that Oklahoma had no plans to use nitrogen hypoxia,⁴⁴ effectively acknowledging that the "fool-proof" method wasn't so fool-proof after all. The state had legislated in haste and had the opportunity to observe the consequences from a distance as other states forged ahead with implementation.

The broader lesson extends beyond Oklahoma and beyond nitrogen hypoxia. It speaks to the importance of evidence-based policymaking, the value of expert input and the dangers of letting urgency override careful deliberation. It reminds us that complex problems rarely have simple solutions, that theoretical models don't always predict real-world outcomes and that when the stakes are highest---when human life hangs in the balance---the obligation to proceed carefully and thoughtfully is greatest.

The search for a humane method of execution continues to elude states that practice capital punishment, despite more than a century of attempts. Each generation of lawmakers believes it has found the answer---and each method eventually reveals problems that its proponents didn't anticipate. Whether this pattern will eventually lead states to reconsider capital punishment itself or whether it will simply continue the cycle of searching for yet another "better" method remains to be seen. What is clear is that promises of a fool-proof solution should be met with skepticism informed by history, careful attention to empirical evidence and recognition that human physiology and death itself resist easy management or control.

XIII. Eyewitness Consequences

The troubling outcomes of nitrogen hypoxia in Alabama and Louisiana confirmed what history and physiology had already suggested: Despite promises of simplicity and humaneness, the method produced visible suffering, prolonged consciousness and violent physiological reactions. The extension of Oklahoma's theoretical confidence into other states revealed the full consequences of legislating without empirical evidence or expert oversight. The pattern was familiar; each new execution method arrived with assurances of reliability, only to confront the unpredictability of the human body in the face of death.

I witnessed this reality firsthand during two executions in Alabama: Kenneth Eugene Smith and Anthony Boyd. In both cases, what occurred directly contradicted the assurances that Oklahoma legislators had offered. Both men gasped, convulsed and struggled as oxygen deprivation took hold. The scenes were harrowing and undeniable---far from the calm clinical deaths that had been promised. They reflected exactly the physiological complexities and ethical vulnerabilities that the state had chosen to ignore or underestimate. Being present in the execution chamber brought the consequences of Oklahoma's "fool-proof" vision into stark human terms. These were not hypothetical failures or distant reports. They were real lived moments of suffering---and the horrors continue to accumulate with every subsequent nitrogen hypoxia execution. This is the story of such moments, the story of nitrogen hypoxia.

Endnotes

1. Katie Fretland, "Clayton Lockett Writhed and Groaned After Execution Began," The Guardian, Apr. 30, 2014, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/apr/30/oklahoma-execution-botched-clayton-lockett; see also Scott Neuman, "Oklahoma Approves Nitrogen Asphyxiation for Executions," NPR, Apr. 17, 2015, https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/04/17/400444876/oklahoma-approves-nitrogen-asphyxiation-for-executions.

2. Mike Christian, Statement on Nitrogen Hypoxia, KGOU, Feb. 23, 2015; see also Eli Hager, "Why Oklahoma Plans to Execute People With Nitrogen," The Marshall Project, Mar. 15, 2018, https://www.themarshallproject.org/2018/03/15/why-oklahoma-plans-to-execute-people-with-nitrogen.

3. "UPDATE: Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin approves never-before-used execution method," KFOR.com, Apr. 17, 2015, https://kfor.com/news/oklahoma-lawmakers-unveil-never-before-used-execution-method-headed-to-governors-desk.

4. Hager, supra note 2 (explaining the physiological rationale for nitrogen hypoxia and discussing Christian's arguments about drug shortages).

5. Dana G. Smith, "Nitrogen Execution Method Touted as More 'Humane,' but Evidence Is Lacking," Scientific American, Sept. 23, 2022, https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-execution-method-touted-as-more-humane-but-evidence-is-lacking.

6. Quinton Chandler, "Oklahoma Officials Endorse Nitrogen Executions As 'Humane,' But Some Medical Experts Aren't Sure," StateImpact Oklahoma, Apr. 19, 2018, https://stateimpact.npr.org/oklahoma/2018/04/19/oklahoma-officials-endorse-nitrogen-executions-as-humane-but-some-medical-experts-arent-sure; see also Hager, supra note 2.

7. Hager, supra note 2.

8. "Experimental Executions: State Lawmakers Consider Untested Gas Asphyxiation," KGOU, Feb. 23, 2015, https://www.kgou.org/politics-and-government/2015-02-23/experimental-executions-state-lawmakers-consider-untested-gas-asphyxiation (noting ethical objections raised during legislative hearings).

9. Deborah W. Denno, "Lethal Injection Chaos Post-Baze," Georgetown Law Journal 102 (2014). https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/506. See also Deborah W. Denno, "The Lethal Injection Quandary: How Medicine Has Dismantled the Death Penalty," Fordham Law Review 76 (2007). https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol76/iss1/3. Denno quoted in Ralph Chapoco, "Doctors, Ethicists Skeptical That Nitrogen Executions Will Be Humane," Alabama Reflector, Sept. 7, 2023, https://alabamareflector.com/2023/09/07/doctors-ethicists-skeptical-that-nitrogen-executions-will-be-humane; see also Denno quoted in Khaleda Rahman, "Nitrogen Gas Executions Could Go Horribly Wrong. Here's Why," Newsweek, Jan. 16, 2024, https://www.newsweek.com/nitrogen-gas-executions-could-horribly-wrong-1824353 (describing Alabama's protocol as "vague, sloppy, dangerous, and unjustifiably deficient" and noting that experts can "only speculate about how a state might conduct a nitrogen hypoxia execution").

10. Chandler, supra note 6 (quoting Copeland: "100 percent confidence that we know what happens when a person doesn't breathe oxygen"); see also Michael Copeland, Christine Papas, and Thom Parr, Nitrogen Induced Hypoxia as a Form of Capital Punishment (Executive Summary, 2015).

11. Jack Schuler, "Can Executions Be More Humane?" The Atlantic, Mar. 20, 2015, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/can-executions-be-more-humane/388249; see also Hager, supra note 2.

12. Hager, supra note 2 (noting that Christian enlisted three non-scientists to study nitrogen hypoxia, that medical professionals at the University of Oklahoma declined to help, and that the report was prepared after just three hours of work); "Experimental Executions ...," supra note 8 (reporting that the bill "passed without debate" in committee).

13. "Governor Fallin Signs Bill Allowing Nitrogen Hypoxia Executions," KGOU, Apr. 17, 2015, https://www.kgou.org/oklahoma-news/2015-04-17/governor-fallin-signs-bill-allowing-nitrogen-hypoxia-executions.

14. Salvador Hernandez, "Oklahoma to Use Nitrogen for Executions if Lethal Injections Are Banned," BuzzFeed News, Apr. 17, 2015, https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/oklahoma-to-use-nitrogen-for-executions-if-lethal-injections (quoting Governor Fallin's statement upon signing); Barbara Hoberock, "Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin signs bill adding nitrogen gas as state execution method," Tulsa World, Apr. 17, 2015, https://tulsaworld.com/news/capitol_report/oklahoma-gov-mary-fallin-signs-bill-adding-nitrogen-gas-as/article_6368deaf-7905-5285-8393-8b5c5497ccb2.html.

15. Hernandez, supra note 14; see also Tracy Connor, "Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin Makes Nitrogen Gas Backup Execution Method," NBC News, Apr. 17, 2015.

16. Mark Berman, "Oklahoma Approves Gas as Backup Execution Method," Washington Post, Apr. 17, 2015, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/04/17/oklahoma-says-it-will-now-use-nitrogen-gas-as-its-backup-method-of-execution/.

17. Lauren Gill, "Using Nitrogen Gas for Executions Is Untested and Poorly Understood," The Appeal, Oct. 25, 2019, https://theappeal.org/using-nitrogen-gas-for-executions-is-untested-and-poorly-understood-three-states-plan-to-do-it-anyway/ (comprehensive analysis of nitrogen hypoxia adoption, historical execution method evolution, and policy implications).

18. Ibid.

19. See Hager, supra note 2 (noting that Christian enlisted three non-scientists to study nitrogen hypoxia, that medical professionals at the University of Oklahoma declined to help, and that the report was prepared after just three hours of work); "Experimental Executions ...," supra note 8 (reporting that the bill "passed without debate" in committee).

20. See Death Penalty Information Center, "125 Years Ago, First Execution Using Electric Chair Was Botched," Aug. 6, 2015, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/125-years-ago-first-execution-using-electric-chair-was-botched (noting that proponents of electrocution "touted the new method as quick, effective, painless, and humane: the same arguments later used by legislators to support lethal injection and execution by nitrogen gas"); Austin Sarat, "The Gas Chamber, 100 Years of Cruelty," Verdict, Feb. 19, 2024, https://verdict.justia.com/2024/02/19/the-gas-chamber-100-years-of-cruelty ("Like every other method of execution used in this country, execution by lethal gas has not been safe, reliable, or humane").

21. "First Execution by Electric Chair," History.com, Aug. 6, 1890, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/august-6/first-execution-by-electric-chair ("Electrocution as a humane means of execution was first suggested in 1881 by Dr. Albert Southwick. ... In the prevalent form of execution at the time---death by hanging---the condemned were known to hang by their broken necks for up to 30 minutes before succumbing to asphyxiation"); see also Death Penalty Information Center, supra note 20.

22. Death Penalty Information Center, supra note 20 (describing the first electrocution: "After 2 minutes the execution chamber filled with the smell of burning flesh. 2 of the witnesses fainted. ... Newspapers called the execution a 'historic bungle' and 'disgust­ing, sick­en­ing and inhu­man'"); see also "First Execution by Electric Chair," supra note 21 (noting that during William Kemmler's execution, "smoke was observed coming from the head of Kemmler" and George Westinghouse remarked, "They would have done better with an axe").

23. Ibid.

24. American Medical Association, "Capital Punishment," Code of Medical Ethics Opinion 9.7.3, https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/ethics/capital-punishment; see also Denno, "The Lethal Injection Quandary ...," supra note 9 (discussing ethical prohibitions on physician participation in executions); "First Execution by Lethal Gas," History.com, Feb. 8, 1924, https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/first-execution-by-lethal-gas ("Lethal gas was adopted by Nevada in 1921 as a more humane method of carrying out its death sentences, as opposed to the traditional techniques of execution by hanging, firing squad or electrocution"); see also "Gas Chamber," Encyclopædia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/gas-chamber ("The gas chamber was first adopted in the U.S. state of Nevada in 1921 in an effort to provide a more humane form of capital punishment").

25. Smith, supra note 5; Sarat, supra note 20 ("Over the course of the hundred years that separated Jon's and Smith's executions, the history of the gas chamber... has been marked by claims that it would provide a painless death and a long series of failures to live up to that promise"); see also Denno quoted in Gill, supra note 17 ("History has shown they only get worse. They only get sloppier, they only get riskier").

26. Joel Zivot, "I'm an anesthesiologist. Kenneth Smith's execution by nitrogen gas was far from 'textbook,'" STAT, Jan. 29, 2024, https://www.statnews.com/2024/01/29/kenneth-smith-nitrogen-gas-execution-science-alabama/ (medical analysis of autopsy findings including pulmonary edema); Gill, supra note 17 (noting that "there is a limited body of scientific research on the use of nitrogen to kill humans" and quoting Denno: "History has shown they only get worse. They only get sloppier, they only get riskier"); see also Smith, supra note 5 (quoting law professor Corinna Barrett Lain: "The entire proposal for nitrogen gas was the product of a 14-page report made by a criminal justice professor. He's not a doctor. He doesn't have any medical training. He's not a scientist").

27. American Medical Association, supra note 24; see also Denno, "The Lethal Injection Quandary ...," supra note 9.

28. Ibid.

29. Death Penalty Information Center, Mar. 12, 2024, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/three-largest-nitrogen-gas-manufacturers-in-the-u-s-prohibit-products-from-use-in-executions.

30. Brianna Bailey, "Concerns About Nitrogen Execution Method Rely on Analogies, Not Human Trials," The Frontier, Mar. 16, 2018, https://www.readfrontier.org/stories/oklahoma-could-execute-inmates-using-nitrogen-without-help-from-licensed-medical-professionals (discussing the inadequacy of medical oversight and actual human-trial data in the development and implementation of nitrogen hypoxia execution protocols).

31. Kim Chandler, "Alabama Executes Kenneth Smith with Nitrogen Gas, First Time Method Used in U.S.," Associated Press, Jan. 25, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/nitrogen-execution-kenneth-smith-alabama.

32. Death Penalty Information Center, "Alabama Executes Kenneth Smith Using Nitrogen Gas in Nation's First Such Execution," Jan. 26, 2024, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/the-world-is-watching-witnesses-report-kenneth-smith-appeared-conscious-shook-and-writhed-during-first-ever-nitrogen-hypoxia-execution (compiling witness accounts).

33. Zivot, supra note 26.

34. Hoffman v. Westcott, No. 3:25-cv-00169, Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, filed 2025 (describing eyewitness accounts of nitrogen hypoxia executions in Alabama showing prolonged consciousness, violent bodily reactions, and visible distress).

35. Bucklew v. Precythe, 139 S. Ct. 1112 (2019).

36. UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, "United States: UN Experts Alarmed by First Execution by Nitrogen Asphyxiation," Jan. 26, 2024; ACLU of Alabama, "UN Experts Describe Nitrogen-Gas Executions as Torture or Cruel Treatment," Feb. 1, 2024, https://www.aclu.org/news/capital-punishment/alabama-has-executed-a-man-with-nitrogen-gas-despite-jurys-life-verdict.

37. Smith, supra note 5.

38. Gill, supra note 17.

39. Ibid.

40. Hoffman v. Westcott, No. 3:25-cv-00169, Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, filed 2025 (describing eyewitness accounts of nitrogen hypoxia executions in Alabama showing prolonged consciousness, violent bodily reactions, and visible distress).

41. American Medical Association, supra note 24.

42. Hoffman v. Westcott, No. 3:25-cv-00169, Memorandum in Support of Motion for Preliminary Injunction, U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana, filed 2025 (describing eyewitness accounts of nitrogen hypoxia executions in Alabama showing prolonged consciousness, violent bodily reactions, and visible distress).

43. Result of findings here Gill, supra note 17.

44. Sean Murphy, "Oklahoma Governor Says He's Not Interested in Changing from Lethal Injection to Nitrogen Executions," Associated Press, Jan. 30, 2024, https://apnews.com/article/oklahoma-death-penalty-lethal-injection-nitrogen-stitt-f1877dba8f521554e1658f92eabcffba.