Skip to main content

Emergency application · Capital case

Lethal injection methods

Richard Jordan v. Mississippi State Executioner

Denied
No. 24A1279Stay applicationFiled by a prisoner facing executionPresented to Justice AlitoFrom United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

What did the Court do?

The Court denied the request on June 25, 2025 and refused to halt the execution.

Emergency rulings are temporary and do not decide the underlying case.

Filed Ruled 1 day after filing

What's being asked

Richard Jordan, a death-row prisoner, asked the Supreme Court to pause his execution while it considered his request to review the Fifth Circuit's ruling. He challenges Mississippi's three-drug lethal-injection method, which uses midazolam, a paralytic drug, and potassium chloride. Jordan says a single-drug barbiturate method would reduce or remove risks from the other drugs. The Fifth Circuit upheld a district court's refusal to block that protocol.

What the Court did

The Court refused to pause Jordan's execution and refused to hear his challenge (denied his petition for Supreme Court review). This order does not decide whether Mississippi's execution method is lawful; the Court did not publish how the justices voted.

Vote not published · 9the order does not say how they voted
  1. Roberts
  2. Thomas
  3. Alito
  4. Sotomayor
  5. Kagan
  6. Gorsuch
  7. Kavanaugh
  8. Barrett
  9. Jackson
The order does not say how any justice voted, as is usual on the emergency docket.
Half of 91 rulings on capital applications decided without a response came 2 to 5 days after filing, and the median was 3 days; this one was ruled on 1 day after filing.

What it means

The order addresses only Jordan's request for a temporary pause; it does not decide whether Mississippi's execution method is lawful. No related case on the main question is listed, and no argument is set. The record does not say whether further proceedings continue in the Fifth Circuit.

Sources

Facts on this page come from the Supreme Court docket, orders, and opinions for No. 24A1279. The answers restate that record in plain words; explainer copy is written from the record and the filings only.

Checked October 4, 2026