1. Is a narrowly tailored Eighth Amendment claim based on a State's documented, repeated maladministration of its chosen method of execution subject to the same pleading requirements as a challenge to the constitutionality of the method of execution itself?

2. Does a petitioner sufficiently allege a substantial risk of severe harm for a standalone Eighth Amendment maladministration claim by proffering (1) undisputed records showing a State's pattern of significant deviations from its the execution protocol, such as th e repeated use of expired and inaccurately dosed lethal injection drugs, and (2) a medical expert's opinion that such deviations if repeated will likely result in severe pain to the petitioner?

3. May the proposed alternative in an Eighth Amendment maladministration case include review and safeguards to ensure future adherence to the protocol, rather than an entirely new method of execution?

Is a narrowly tailored Eighth Amendment claim based on a State's documented, repeated maladministration of its chosen method of execution subject to the same pleading requirements as a challenge to the constitutionality of the method of execution itself?