In 2025, the United States experienced a significant increase in executions, reaching a total of 47 across 11 states. This marked the highest annual total since 2009 according to the Death Penalty Information Center. The surge followed a decline in executions in recent years and was influenced by several factors, including the Trump administration’s policy stance on the death penalty and the lifting of moratoriums in states like Arizona, which had paused executions for procedural reassessments.
The Supreme Court’s involvement has been notable, as it consistently denied all emergency requests to delay executions throughout the year. These requests were predominantly filed in the days leading up to the scheduled executions, seeking postponements to allow further legal challenges. The court, however, largely chose not to intervene, often without any documented dissension among the justices, save for a few exceptions noted by the SCOTUSblog’s database of capital cases.
In several prominent cases, certain justices highlighted potential legal oversights. For example, Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson expressed their concern in cases like Hoffman v. Westcott, where the use of nitrogen hypoxia was contested on religious grounds under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act. However, these dissents largely went unheeded as the executions proceeded.
Justice Sotomayor’s critiques were particularly pointed in cases such as Boyd v. Hamm, where she argued against the use of nitrogen hypoxia, suggesting it violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment. Despite her vivid portrayal of the method’s potential horrors, her plea to allow death row inmate Anthony Boyd a firing squad execution was not supported by her colleagues.
As 2026 unfolds, the Supreme Court has already begun to decline requests for execution delays, with 18 more executions scheduled this year. The court’s upcoming rulings on two death penalty-related cases regarding intellectual disability assessments and racial discrimination in jury selection could have broader implications on capital punishment cases nationwide.
For further reading, visit the original SCOTUSblog article.