Whether the State of Alabama's planned execution of Kenneth Eugene Smith using nitrogen hypoxia—a method never before attempted by any State or the federal government—using procedures set forth in a protocol that has never been tested, violates the Eighth Amendment because it creates a substantial risk of severe pain and suffering, including a substantial risk that Mr. Smith will vomit during the execution and asphyxiate, causing prolonged or superadded pain and suffering, when feasible and readily available alternatives—including a hood or closed chamber system for nitrogen hypoxia, or, in the alternative, the firing squad—would significantly reduce those risks.

Whether Mr. Smith's Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection claim was improperly dismissed for lack of standing, where Mr. Smith alleged that the execution will violate his Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection rights because he has not fully exhausted claims first presented in a postconviction petition arising out of the State's previous, failed attempt to execute him, similarly situated condemned people are not subject to execution under those circumstances, and the State's plan to execute Mr. Smith violates the State's custom to wait until a person's conventional appeals are exhausted before an execution date is set.

Whether the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments prohibit a state from executing an inmate using an untested nitrogen hypoxia method that poses a substantial risk of serious harm and violates equal protection principles