Bucklew v. Precythe
E649390
Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Bucklew v. Precythe canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T7193397 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Bucklew v. Precythe Context triple: [Glossip v. Gross, relatedCase, Bucklew v. Precythe]
-
A.
Maryland v. King
Maryland v. King is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of collecting DNA samples from individuals arrested for serious offenses under the Fourth Amendment.
-
B.
DeBoer v. Snyder
DeBoer v. Snyder was a federal court case challenging Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban that became one of the key cases consolidated into the landmark Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
-
C.
Washington v. Davis
Washington v. Davis is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that held laws or policies with a racially disproportionate impact do not violate the Equal Protection Clause absent proof of discriminatory intent.
-
D.
Virginia v. Black
Virginia v. Black is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a ban on cross burning carried out with intent to intimidate while clarifying the limits of First Amendment protection for hate speech and symbolic expression.
-
E.
Arizona v. Johnson
Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Bucklew v. Precythe Target entity description: Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
-
A.
Maryland v. King
Maryland v. King is a 2013 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the constitutionality of collecting DNA samples from individuals arrested for serious offenses under the Fourth Amendment.
-
B.
DeBoer v. Snyder
DeBoer v. Snyder was a federal court case challenging Michigan’s same-sex marriage ban that became one of the key cases consolidated into the landmark Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide.
-
C.
Washington v. Davis
Washington v. Davis is a 1976 U.S. Supreme Court case that held laws or policies with a racially disproportionate impact do not violate the Equal Protection Clause absent proof of discriminatory intent.
-
D.
Virginia v. Black
Virginia v. Black is a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld a ban on cross burning carried out with intent to intimidate while clarifying the limits of First Amendment protection for hate speech and symbolic expression.
-
E.
Arizona v. Johnson
Arizona v. Johnson is a 2009 U.S. Supreme Court case that clarified police authority to frisk passengers during lawful traffic stops when officers reasonably suspect they are armed and dangerous.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Eighth Amendment case
ⓘ
United States Supreme Court case ⓘ capital punishment case ⓘ |
| areaOfLaw |
constitutional law
ⓘ
criminal procedure ⓘ death penalty jurisprudence ⓘ |
| argumentDate | 2018-11-06 ⓘ |
| challengedMethodOfExecution | lethal injection using pentobarbital ⓘ |
| citation | 587 U.S. ___ (2019) ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvision |
Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution
ⓘ
Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution ⓘ
linked to:
Fourteenth Amendment
|
| court | Supreme Court of the United States ⓘ |
| decisionDate | 2019-04-01 ⓘ |
| dissentingOpinionBy |
Elena Kagan
ⓘ
Ruth Bader Ginsburg ⓘ Sonia Sotomayor ⓘ Stephen G. Breyer ⓘ |
| docketNumber | No. 17-8151 ⓘ |
| holding |
Inmates bringing method-of-execution challenges must identify a feasible, readily implemented alternative method that would significantly reduce a substantial risk of severe pain
ⓘ
Missouri’s method of execution did not violate the Eighth Amendment as applied to Bucklew ⓘ The alternative method of execution need not be authorized under current state law ⓘ |
| impact |
clarified that as-applied method-of-execution challenges follow the same framework as facial challenges
ⓘ
raised the evidentiary burden on inmates challenging methods of execution ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | Missouri ⓘ |
| legalIssue |
Eighth Amendment challenge to method of execution
ⓘ
constitutionality of Missouri’s lethal injection protocol ⓘ standard for as-applied method-of-execution challenges ⓘ |
| majorityJoin |
Brett M. Kavanaugh
ⓘ
Clarence Thomas ⓘ John G. Roberts, Jr. ⓘ
linked to:
John G. Roberts Jr.
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. ⓘ
linked to:
Samuel A. Alito Jr.
|
| majorityOpinionBy |
Neil Gorsuch
ⓘ
linked to:
Neil M. Gorsuch
|
| petitioner | Russell Bucklew ⓘ |
| petitionerClaim | Missouri’s lethal injection protocol would cause him severe pain due to his rare medical condition ⓘ |
| petitionerCondition | cavernous hemangioma ⓘ |
| precedentCited |
Baze v. Rees
ⓘ
Glossip v. Gross ⓘ |
| principle |
Method-of-execution challenges are disfavored when brought late in the process
ⓘ
The Eighth Amendment does not guarantee a prisoner a painless death ⓘ |
| proposedAlternativeMethod | execution by nitrogen hypoxia ⓘ |
| respondent | Anne L. Precythe ⓘ |
| respondentOffice | Director of the Missouri Department of Corrections ⓘ |
| resultForPetitioner | relief denied ⓘ |
| standardClarified | Glossip v. Gross alternative-method requirement applies to as-applied challenges ⓘ |
| state | Missouri ⓘ |
| term | October Term 2018 ⓘ |
| vote | 5-4 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Bucklew v. Precythe Description of subject: Bucklew v. Precythe is a 2019 U.S. Supreme Court decision that upheld Missouri’s method of execution against an Eighth Amendment challenge, clarifying the standards for inmates claiming that a particular execution protocol would cause them severe pain.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.