Emergency application · Capital case
Electric chair executions
Stephen C. Stanko v. Joel E. Anderson, Interim Director, South Carolina Department of Corrections
What did the Court do?
The Court denied the request on June 13, 2025 and refused to halt the execution.
Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case.
What's being asked
Stephen C. Stanko, a South Carolina death-row prisoner, asked the Supreme Court to temporarily pause his execution, scheduled for June 13, 2025. He argues South Carolina's law is unconstitutional because in 2021 it made electrocution the default method, after listing it as an alternative since 1995.
What the Court did
The Court refused to pause Stanko's execution and denied (turned down) his request for a stay (a temporary pause). The order did not decide whether South Carolina's law is constitutional. The Court did not publish how the justices voted.
What it means
This emergency ruling concerned only a temporary pause; it did not decide whether Stanko's challenge to South Carolina's law succeeds. The record identifies the Fourth Circuit as the lower court but does not say whether further proceedings continue there. The docket lists no related Supreme Court case about the main legal question, and no argument is set.
Sources
Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 24A1231. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.