Braun says Indiana is out of execution drugs, signals willingness to debate capital punishment
Gov. Mike Braun speaks to reporters at the Indiana Statehouse on Tuesday, June 3, 2025. (Casey Smith/Indiana Capital Chronicle)
Indiana has exhausted its supply of lethal injection drugs after carrying out two executions in the past six months — and Gov. Mike Braun said Tuesday he doesn't plan to buy more, at least for now.
The governor's remarks followed the state's December execution of Joseph Corcoran — Indiana's first since 2009 — and last month's execution of Benjamin Ritchie.
Recent reporting by the Indiana Capital Chronicle revealed the state spent $900,000 last year to obtain pentobarbital to carry out executions, but officials wouldn't say how much was purchased and refused to provide information on expiration dates, storage or other details.
Braun said the high cost and short shelf life of the drug should prompt new discussions on how the state approaches capital punishment moving forward.
... I'm not going to be for putting it on the shelf and then letting them expire.
– Indiana Gov. Mike Braun
'We've got to address the broad issue of, what are other methods, the discussion of capital punishment in general, and then something that costs, I think, $300,000 a pop that has a 90-day shelf life — I'm not going to be for putting it on the shelf and then letting them expire,' the governor told reporters at the Indiana Statehouse.
Braun, a Republican in his first year as governor, said the question of whether Indiana should continue to carry out executions at all is one that lawmakers should weigh in the months ahead.
'There are legislators that wonder if it's still relevant,' Braun continued. 'I'm going to listen to them, the courts, and the broader discussion in general.'
Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita and former Gov. Eric Holcomb announced the state's acquisition of pentobarbital in June 2024, but it's not clear when the state ultimately received the drugs.
Indiana Department of Correction officials have refused to disclose how many doses of pentobarbital were used for each of recent executions, or how close the drug was to its expiration when it was administered.
'I think we got in a pickle where we stored three, and now it looks like … it will be coming up again,' Braun said Tuesday, appearing to refer to execution drug expiration.
'Violent' moment during Indiana execution draws scrutiny; DOC officials deny 'botched' process
Current Indiana law only allows lethal injection as a means of execution. The one-drug method is a departure from the state's protocol used since 1995, involving a series of three chemicals.
But with ongoing drug shortages and increasing legal and political complications, some states have revived older execution methods — or approved new ones.
South Carolina recently reinstated the firing squad as an option after years of delays due to its inability to obtain lethal injection drugs. The state has so far carried out two executions by firing squad in 2025 — the first in the U.S. in 15 years.
According to the Death Penalty Information Center, prior to South Carolina's move only three executions by firing squad had taken place nationwide since 1977 — all in Utah.
It's expected to be the primary method for executions in Idaho starting in 2026. Mississippi and Oklahoma also permit firing squads, but only as a secondary method to lethal injection.
Braun pointed to South Carolina, specifically, but he didn't endorse any specific execution method.
Nine states permit executions by lethal gas, but only five — Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi and Oklahoma — specifically authorize death by nitrogen hypoxia, a process that deprives inmates of oxygen using nitrogen gas.
So far, Alabama and Louisiana are the only states that have performed executions by nitrogen gas, according to the Death Penalty Information Center.
Arizona and Mississippi additionally allow gas chambers, a method in which inmates are exposed to a lethal gas — traditionally hydrogen cyanide — inside a sealed chamber. The process can take several minutes, however, and has drawn criticism over the risk of prolonged suffering.
Earlier this year, some Indiana lawmakers — from both sides of the aisle — questioned the future of capital punishment in the state.
Rep. Bob Morris, R-Fort Wayne, filed House Bill 1030, which sought to abolish the death penalty altogether in Indiana and replace it with life without parole. He later discussed plans to scale back the bill — and instead focus on execution drug rules and witness guidelines — hoping that a narrowed proposal could give it a better chance at advancing through the legislative process.
Despite some bipartisan support, Morris' bill never received a committee hearing in the House, effectively killing the measure.
Separately, an amendment Morris offered on another bill sought to require that Indiana State Police test pentobarbital between 12 and 24 hours before an execution to ensure the substance is '100% effective' before it's administered. But that proposal never moved, either.
Other Republican and Democratic lawmakers have previously suggested narrowing the list of crimes eligible for execution or mandating that any new methods meet constitutional and ethical standards.
No one has been added to death row in Indiana since 2013 as many prosecutors choose life in prison without parole over the cost of a death penalty trial.
The next opportunity for lawmakers to file and debate bills is during next year's legislative session, slated to begin in January 2026.
The last person executed in Indiana before Corcoran was Eric Wrinkles in 2009. Six inmates currently remain on Indiana's death row, and more than a dozen capital punishment cases are still pending statewide.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
6 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Trump's move against Iran may draw more criticism from MAGA's anti-interventionists
President Donald Trump's decision to strike three nuclear sites in Iran could deepen a divide among some of the Republican's supporters, including high-profile backers who had said any such move would run counter to the anti-interventionism he promised to deliver. Notably though, immediately following Trump's Saturday announcement of the strike, some of those who had publicly spoken out against U.S. involvement voiced their support. The lead-up to the move against Iranian nuclear sites had exposed fissures within Trump's 'Make American Great Again' base as some of that movement's most vocal leaders, with large followings of their own, expressed deep concern about the prospect of U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran war. With the president barred from seeking a third term, what remains unknown is how long-lasting the schism could be for Trump and his current priorities, as well as the overall future of his 'America First' movement. Among the surrogates who spoke out against American involvement were former senior adviser Steve Bannon, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., commentator Tucker Carlson and Charlie Kirk, the founder of the conservative youth organization Turning Point. Part of their consternation was rooted in Trump's own vocalized antipathy for what he and others have termed the 'forever wars' fomented in previous administrations. As the possibility of military action neared, some of those voices tamped down their rhetoric. According to Trump, Carlson even called to 'apologize.' Steve Bannon On Wednesday, Bannon, one of top advisers in Trump's 2016 campaign, told an audience in Washington that bitter feelings over Iraq were a driving force for Trump's first presidential candidacy and the MAGA movement. "One of the core tenets is no forever wars,' Bannon said. But the longtime Trump ally, who served a four-month sentence for defying a subpoena in the congressional investigation into the U.S. Capitol attack on Jan. 6, 2021, went on to suggest that Trump will maintain loyalty from his base no matter what. On Wednesday, Bannon acknowledged that while he and others will argue against military intervention until the end, 'the MAGA movement will back Trump.' Ultimately, Bannon said that Trump would have to make the case to the American people if he wanted to get involved in Iran. 'We don't like it. Maybe we hate it,' Bannon said, predicting what the MAGA response would be. 'But, you know, we'll get on board.' Tucker Carlson The commentator's rhetoric toward Trump was increasingly critical. Carlson, who headlined large rallies with the Republican during the 2024 campaign, earlier this month suggested that the president's posture was breaking his pledge to keep the U.S. out of new foreign entanglements. Trump clapped back at Carlson on social media, calling him 'kooky.' During an event at the White House on Wednesday, Trump said that Carlson had 'called and apologized' for calling him out. Trump said Carlson 'is a nice guy.' Carlson's conversation with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that day laid bare the divides among many Republicans. The two sparred for two hours over a variety of issues, primarily about possible U.S. involvement in Iran. Carlson accused Cruz of placing too much emphasis on protecting Israel in his foreign policy worldview. 'You don't know anything about Iran,' Carlson said to Cruz, after the senator said he didn't know Iran's population or its ethnic composition. 'You're a senator who's calling for the overthrow of a government, and you don't know anything about the country.' Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene The Georgia Republican, who wore the signature red MAGA cap for Democratic President Joe Biden's State of the Union address in 2024, publicly sided with Carlson, criticizing Trump for deriding 'one of my favorite people.' Saying the former Fox News commentator 'unapologetically believes the same things I do,' Greene wrote on X this past week that those beliefs include that 'foreign wars/intervention/regime change put America last, kill innocent people, are making us broke, and will ultimately lead to our destruction.' 'That's not kooky,' Greene added, using the same word Trump used to describe Carlson. 'That's what millions of Americans voted for. It's what we believe is America First.' About an hour before Trump's announcement, Greene posted on X that, 'Every time America is on the verge of greatness, we get involved in another foreign war.' 'This is not our fight,' she added. 'Peace is the answer.' In another post following Trump's announcement, Greene urged, 'Let us all join together and pray for peace." Alex Jones The far-right conspiracy theorist and Infowars host posted on social media earlier in the week a side-by-side of Trump's official presidential headshot and an artificial intelligence-generated composite of Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush. Trump and many of his allies have long disparaged Bush for involving the United States in the 'forever wars' in Iraq and Afghanistan. Writing 'What you voted for' above Trump's image and 'What you got' above the composite, Jones added: 'I hope this is not the case…' Charlie Kirk Kirk is among those who seemed to have made a quick about-face. About an hour after Trump's announcement, Kirk posted a series of messages on social media supportive of Trump, saying Iran had given the president 'no choice.' Kirk praised Trump for acting 'with prudence and decisiveness" and 'for the betterment of humanity.' Kirk also reposted a 2011 tweet in which Trump had written that 'Iran's quest for nuclear weapons is a major threat to our nation's national security interests. We can't allow Iran to go nuclear.' 'When Trump speaks, you should listen,' Kirk added. It was a different tone from the start of the week, when Kirk said in a Fox News interview that 'this is the moment that President Trump was elected for.' But he had warned of a potential MAGA divide over Iran. Days later, Kirk said that 'Trump voters, especially young people, supported President Trump because he was the first president in my lifetime to not start a new war.' He also wrote that 'there is historically little support for America to be actively engaged in yet another offensive war in the Middle East. We must work for and pray for peace.'
Miami Herald
14 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
Thomas Massie Says Iran Attack ‘Unconstitutional' as Trump Divides MAGA
Republican Representative Thomas Massie said that President Donald Trump's decision to bomb three nuclear sites in Iran is "unconstitutional" as the president faces stark division within his own party. Newsweek reached out to the White House via email Saturday night for comment. Israel launched attacks against Iran's capital city of Tehran earlier this month in what it called a "preemptive strike" and warned its citizens of retaliatory bombings from Iran. Military tensions between the two countries have rapidly escalated in the days since as Trump continues to double down that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon. Taking to X, formerly Twitter, after Trump announced the strikes, Massie said, "This is not Constitutional." Trump announced the military move on Truth Social saying the U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz, and Esfahan in Iran. The president said all planes are now out of Iran air space and "safely on their way home." Massie has been a staunch opponent of striking Iran, previously saying he would not back a move to get involved in a "regime change war." Other Republican leaders like Lindsey Graham have urged Trump to go "all in" on Iran. This is a developing story that will be updated with additional information. Related Articles Trump Says US Bombed Iran's Nuclear Fortress of Fordow and Two Other SitesState Dept Starts Exit Flights From Israel as Trump Mulls War EntryB2 Bombers Move Into Pacific As Israel Hits Iran Radar Near Strait of HormuzSatellite Images Show Israeli Strike Damage to Iranian Nuclear Site 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Miami Herald
14 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
How Nevada's elections will change with new 2025 laws
LAS VEGAS — New laws from the 2025 legislative session aim to increase accessibility to Nevada's elections and improve voters' experiences. Election reform was a major focus in Carson City, though bills that sought to drastically change Nevada's elections were blocked by the governor, including legislation to implement voter ID requirements and to allow nonpartisan voters to participate in primaries. Other bills seeking changes were successful, from requiring that sample ballots be sent before official mail ballots to disclosing campaign advertisements made with artificial intelligence. 'Everything we tried to do this session has been focused on the voter experience and the voter perspective,' said Democratic Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar. The major highlights Aguilar said the biggest highlight from the legislative session for him was the continued investment into modernizing the state's voter registration system. Nevada appropriated over $27 million to go toward merging Clark County with the other 16 counties into one Voter Registration Election Management Solution system, known as VREMS. Last August, the state launched its top-down voter registration and election management system, which collects and stores voter registration information from all counties. Clark County implemented the system in 2023, and the 16 other counties joined the program in 2024. Now, the two will merge together, Aguilar said. Aguilar said putting all the counties on one system will allow the state to do a better job with voter rolls and build transparency by providing real-time information about the elections process. 'There's consistency from county to county,' he told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. 'There's consistency in polling location to polling location. The security and safety of the election is stronger because everybody's operating off of one unified system that has strong cybersecurity.' The secretary of state's office was also provided $1.5 million for voter education and outreach through Senate Bill 488. That money will allow counties to send text messages to voters about upcoming elections or if their ballot signatures need curing. Other new laws aim to improve voters' experience, Aguilar said. For instance, sample ballots now must be mailed before mail ballots, thanks to a new law put forward by Republican Assemblymember Gregory Hafen and Democratic Speaker Steve Yeager. In 2024, voters expressed confusion when they received their official mail ballots before their sample ballots, which provide voter information about what will appear on the official ballot and includes pros and cons for each ballot question. County or city clerks must also recruit election board officers for polling places on tribal reservations and provide them with training on the reservation, unless a tribe opts to not participate, thanks to the passage of Senate Bill 421, which aims to increase voter participation in Nevada's Indigenous communities. The new law expands on a bill passed in the 2023 Legislature requiring clerks to establish polling places and ballot drop boxes on tribal lands. There were staffing shortages in several locations, including the Shoshone Paiute Tribe of Duck Valley, which had to raise more than $5,000 to staff their polling place, according to Jennifer Willett, the Nevada senior campaign manager for All Voting is Local. 'It's a minor shift, but it'll impact a lot of people,' Willett said. 'Over time, people will know that they can go there, and they'll be able to vote in their community confidently at a staffed polling place.' Another new law, AB 367, aims to improve accessibility to non-English speaking voters. The law creates a language access coordinator in the secretary of state's office and requires the office to make sure voting materials and other election information are available in at least seven of the most commonly spoken languages in Nevada. It also requires the secretary of state to establish a toll-free telephone number voters can use to receive language interpretation assistance for an election. A voter who may be deaf or hard of hearing can also use a mobile device to access interpretive services including American Sign Language. Aguilar said his office was doing that work already, but the bill codifies those practices into law. Nevada is the third most diverse state in the nation, with one in three Nevadans speaking a language other than English at home and nearly 4 percent of Nevadans having a hearing difficulty, Willett said. 'We think that dismantling any barriers for people that don't speak English as their first language, or aren't comfortable speaking English, should be able to register to vote, learn about voting and candidates and cast their ballot using any options that they want,' Willett said. Chuck Muth, a conservative blogger who has long fought to clean up the state's voter rolls, said overall he thinks session was a 'wash' when it came to election reform. Lombardo vetoed bills that Muth said would have harmed Nevada, but not much was done to enhance election security, he said. Muth would have liked to see changes to the mail ballot deadline so that they could not arrive after Election Day, though less than 1 percent of ballots arrive after Election Day, according to Aguilar. Campaigning changes Nevadans can expect to see some changes to campaigning ahead of future elections. Any AI-generated campaign communication — such as a campaign advertisement supporting or opposing a candidate — must disclose that it was made with artificial intelligence after the passage of AB 73. The new law addresses the rising use of AI-generated materials as a cost-effective alternative to traditional ways of creating content, and it comes on the heels of experts expressing concern about the role artificial intelligence will play in elections. Aguilar said the goal of the law is to give voters the context and the source of the information that they're seeing and relying on when deciding how to vote. Muth said he discloses when he uses AI in his newsletter, but he thinks that should be voluntary. 'I just think it's probably problematic whenever the government gets involved,' Muth said. Another new law to reduce intimidation and violence in campaigns. AB 123 prohibits a person from making statements that threaten or intimidate a candidate for public office. The law was sponsored by Democratic Assemblymember Hanadi Nadeem, the first Muslim woman elected to the Legislature. She put forward the bill after experiencing death threats while running for Assembly. 'It was truly a horrific experience I do not wish upon anyone, whether it be a fellow candidate, voter or Nevadan,' Nadeem said during the bill's hearing. 'No one should have to fear for their life or to be discouraged from running for office because of the actions of another.' Aguilar said that bill goes back to overall safety and security of elections, and it also encourages participation. 'We want people to run for office because the more diverse perspective we get, the stronger the state we're going to be,' Aguilar said. 'And if people aren't running because they're fearful, that's the problem.' Another new law, AB 491, requires elected officers to be registered to vote in the state, district, county or township where the officer is required to reside. 'That's the intent, I think, and hopefully it acts as an encouragement to say, if you're going to run for office, that you actually live in the community you're voted to represent,' Aguilar said. ___ Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
