In a federal system, states often look to each other’s experiences to guide new policy initiatives. While mimicking other states can sometimes bring positive outcomes, as political scientist David Schultz notes, it often results in ineffective policies. States might replicate initiatives without confirming their success, leading to failure in delivering intended results. This tendency appears evident in death penalty approaches, too.
Historically, when one state adopts a new execution method, others often follow. Louisiana’s intent to copy Alabama’s nitrogen hypoxia method illustrates this pattern, despite Alabama’s challenges in implementation. Courts must ensure correctness before allowing such replication.
The electric chair is a historical example of this imitation pattern. New York adopted it in 1888, perceiving electrocution as a modern advancement. However, the first execution in 1890 resulted in a gruesome death, yet states like Ohio, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Virginia quickly adopted it, making electrocution widespread.
Similarly, lethal injection gained popularity after Oklahoma passed a law in 1977. Texas, the first user, executed Charles Brooks Jr. in 1982; soon after, other states followed suit.
Today, nitrogen hypoxia follows a similar trend. Oklahoma’s 2015 adoption was pivotal; now Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Mississippi permit it. Alabama conducted the first execution in January 2024, facing significant technical issues during the procedure.
Louisiana plans to use nitrogen hypoxia, drawing critique. Todd Wessinger, scheduled for execution, claims it causes severe suffering, describing oxygen deprivation’s agonizing effects before unconsciousness. Louisiana’s protocol closely mirrors Alabama’s problematic method, as legal actions highlight issues in Alabama’s executions.
The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the significant risk of harm in Alabama’s protocol. These elements should prompt Louisiana courts to reconsider replication based on unverified beliefs in states as policy innovation laboratories. Often, states are merely sites of imitation, driven by myths and leading to recurring failures in policies.
Wessinger’s case exemplifies the dangers of adhering to failed policies without proper evaluation. The call for innovation should not result in repeated replication and harm.