Boyd v Ivey

Miller invokes Louisiana ex rel. Francis to argue that Alabama cannot execute him a second time merely because of the state's own procedural failure, particularly by deploying an untested method that the first attempt did not employ. Under the Baze-Glossip framework, Alabama bears the burden of establishing that nitrogen hypoxia is a known, available alternative that presents a substantially lower risk of severe pain—a showing complicated by the method's experimental status and the absence of established protocols to minimize suffering. The case therefore turns on whether the Eighth Amendment permits states to experiment with novel execution techniques following failed prior attempts, or whether a constitutionally permissible execution method must be proven safe and reliable before the state may inflict it on a death-row inmate.