Tennessee Must Not Execute Its Failure Twice -By Fransiscus Nanga Roka

Tennessee attempted to execute Christa Pike. She did not die, therefore Tennessee became responsible for caring for someone who was harmed by its execution system, which should concern those who support capital punishment.

On September 30, 2026, Pike, age 50, was able to survive a lethal-injection attempt on her life that was meant to carry out the sentence of death for the 1995 murder of Colleen Slemmer. Governor Bill Lee has ordered that all other scheduled executions in 2026 be halted and also ordered an outside investigation into the matter. While the brutality of Slemmer’s murder should be acknowledged, this does not justify the state’s use of brutality.

The new reports change how people understand the medical situation. Attorney’s for Pike reported on October 10 that she had been released from the hospital and returned to prison, as a result of being able to survive two doses of pentobarbital. There is speculation that a poor IV placement may be what caused the issue, however, the exact reason for the issue has not yet been publicly made known. Any claim regarding long term organ damage will need to have documented clinical proof.

Her survival demonstrates how false the idea that lethal injections are simply medical procedures with control. While the clinical nature of this process may create an illusion of safety, it does not change what it was designed to do, nor does it ensure that it will be successful.

There isn’t a classification of prisoners that “should be dead.” Pike is still alive and being held by the state. The Eighth Amendment requires that states provide for prisoners’ seriously needed medical care (Estelle v. Gamble). If there is a dispute regarding how much money is owed to a doctor, this does not give the state an excuse to withhold the needed care.

The same applies to the ethical line. Physician involvement in an execution is forbidden by the AMA. While treating a patient’s injury after an execution serves the role of healing through medicine, having physicians participate in improving the next execution will damage that role. Health care should not be used as a means of preparing for future killing.

The “double jeopardy” argument, however, must be made honestly. An individual’s survival of an execution does not automatically result in the cancellation of their death sentence. The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Louisiana ex rel. Francis v. Resweber (1947) allowed for a second execution attempt when there was an accidental malfunction with the electric chair during the first attempt. This precedent would allow for additional execution attempts on individuals whose executions have failed, thus disproving arguments that would state that such executions are prohibited by the Constitution. However, the conditions surrounding Pike’s treatment and potential future attempts to execute her are subject to legal challenges.

There has been a growing demand for the government to be held responsible using facts, the limits of the constitution, and the ability of the president to pardon people.

First, Lee needs to change Pike’s sentence from death to life in prison. Changing the sentence will continue to provide serious punishment, but will also allow Lee to avoid having to deal with a system that has proved itself to be completely inadequate.

Second, the state of Tennessee needs to preserve all drug sample documentation, as well as the documentation of administering those drugs, monitoring of patients who received them, communication documentation related to the administration of the drugs and witness statements. These items are necessary for independent investigators to determine how things occurred, and then report on their findings so long as they do not violate legitimate privacy rights of individuals involved.

The third requirement is that Pike must continue to be treated by both medical and psychological professionals who make their own clinical treatment choices, regardless of the planning for her execution. Her counsel must also have access to her and any relevant records.

The suspension needs to remain in place until an independent review of the situation takes place and the results of that review are subject to both legal and public review. A date on a calendar does not provide assurance of safety.

Lawmakers need to look into whether the secrecy of the process for executing someone hinders accountability. Lawmakers should determine if protecting employees involved in the execution process from threat can be achieved while providing enough information so that lawmakers may assess the veracity of the State’s statements.

No one can reduce Slemmer’s life or the loss experienced by her family because both the accountability for murder and the restrictions placed upon the use of governmental powers fall under one definition of justice.

Tennessee has a decision to make – either acknowledge the damage caused by the state’s judicial system, or fix the system so that it can be used again. Commutation will demonstrate that while legally authorized penalties do not have to result in a cycle of state-mandated suffering.

Fransiscus Nanga Roka

Faculty of Law University 17 August 1945 Surabaya and Managing partner Law Firm Victorious Indonesia