A point about last night's execution of Nathaniel Woods. It is as much of an indictment of the current system as anything else, including the failure of #SCOTUS to adjust its practices to improve transparency, but there is more nuance involved than some are suggesting.
There was a lot of reporting on the initial stay entered in the case by Justice Thomas. This stay, as I detailed last night, is often referred to as an administrative stay, and is issued in order to give the full court time to consider the issue. 
While some have criticized Thomas for this, the truth is that this is a way of ensuring that a state does *not* proceed with an execution while the stay application is pending. Once a death warrant is active, a state can conduct an execution — but a valid stay halts that.
If you think it's absurd that a state would proceed with an execution while a stay application is pending at the Supreme Court, you only need to look back to Virginia, which did so 5 years ago. buzzfeednews.com/article/chrisg…
Before that, Missouri did the same. theatlantic.com/national/archi…
And so, returning to last night's execution of Nathaniel Woods, what Thomas did — issuing the administrative stay while the full court considered the application — is a responsible attempt by the Supreme Court to prevent that situation from repeating itself.
Unfortunately, SCOTUS's failure to more transparently explain what it is doing led to the administrative stay being reported to be more significant than it was by people who do not know the ins and outs of this unwritten practice. That is bad — and SCOTUS should address it.
All of this, to be sure, is outside of the questions about Woods' case and how the state and courts failed to address those questions. And the larger questions about the death penalty itself.
But, I just wanted to make clear this point about the administrative stay, and why it was good that Thomas issued it.
