In the last session of the supreme court, besides the massive ruling for gay marriage, there was another large, important case that ended very interestingly. The case was whether or not the new drugs being used in lethal injection execution constituted "cruel and unusual punishment." Since most of Europe cut off America from drugs used for lethal injection, states have been forced to experiment with new drugs for lethal injections, that would still be painless. Unfortunately, this experimentation resulted many in many infamous cases of people who were being exectuted feeling extreme pain for prolonged periods of time, after having a new drug used on them, Medazolam (I might be off on that name, maybe misspell). The case was decided 5-4 in favor or keeping the drug legal, on the ground that "the inmates had failed to identify an available and preferable method of execution and failed to make the case that the challenged drug entailed a substantial risk of severe pain." After that, something unprecedented occured. Two dissenters asked to read their dissent aloud, one saying firmly that this drug was cruel and unusual, one saying that the death penalty is inherently cruel and unusual. Finally, on of the majority asked to read his decision, indicating obvious strong feelings between the judges. This issue seems to be something that people feel strongly about all over the world, so what are your thoughts? Do you think that the death penalty is inherently cruel and unusual, or fair? What do you think about this new drug? Is it in particular cruel and unusual? For those outside the united states, what are your thoughts on this?