NASHVILLE, Tenn. — Attorneys for Tennessee death row men Oscar Smith and Byron Black are calling on Governor Bill Lee to issue a temporary halt on executions until March 2026, when a trial on the constitutionality of the state’s new lethal injection protocol is set to begin.
In a letter submitted Thursday and supported by a press conference with faith leaders and advocates, the attorneys argue that proceeding with executions before judicial review would be “unconscionable.”
“Oscar Smith was preparing to accept communion when you courageously and correctly halted his execution on April 21, 2022,” the letter to Governor Lee begins. “After learning that members of your Department of Correction had failed to follow the execution protocols, it was unquestionably the right thing to pause all executions and seek an independent review.”
Following that review, which uncovered a culture of “recklessness and non-compliance” within the Tennessee Department of Correction (TDOC), Governor Lee ordered reforms. But according to attorneys Kelley Henry and Amy Harwell, “except for firing two staff members, it does not appear that the department implemented the safeguards you directed.”
Now, Smith faces execution on May 22 and Black on August 5—both before the courts have ruled on the legality of the state’s new 44-page protocol, which critics argue is significantly less protective than its 100-page predecessor. “Please do the next right thing,” the attorneys write. “Pause all executions in Tennessee until March 1, 2026.”
The reprieve request outlines a number of concerns, including that the new protocol omits crucial safeguards regarding the storage and testing of execution drugs. In 2022, Smith’s execution was halted after it was discovered the chemicals hadn’t been properly tested. An independent investigation later found that TDOC had used drugs that failed potency tests to execute another person, and that a key TDOC official had given false testimony in prior legal challenges.
The new protocol, the attorneys warn, “eliminated the previous safeguards and replaced them with nothing. How can it possibly be that a test so important to the integrity of the process that its failure warranted a reprieve in 2022 can simply be eliminated in 2025?”
The request also raises alarms about the possible use of gray-market drugs. Public records suggest TDOC has spent over $500,000 on pentobarbital—likely purchased from unauthorized distributors, which, the attorneys argue, raises significant risks about the drugs’ potency and legality.
“If manufactured drugs have been sold to TDOC, they have been acquired outside the approved and tightly controlled commercial stream,” the letter warns, citing Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti’s own recent statements against gray-market drug distribution .
Advocates at the press conference echoed these concerns. “It’s shocking that Tennessee is dumping thousands of taxpayer dollars into execution drugs, money that could be used to actually help survivors of violent crime,” said Rafiah Muhammad-McCormick, whose son was murdered in 2020. “Executions don’t fill those needs.”
Faith leaders also added their voices. Rev. Dr. Kevin Riggs, pastor of Franklin Community Church, called on Governor Lee—a fellow person of faith—to act. “I believe by granting a reprieve to these men, the governor will ‘act justly’ and ‘love mercy,’ just as the Bible teaches us all to do.”
The reprieve request underscores that Tennessee law does not allow the Davidson County Chancery Court to stay executions, meaning only Governor Lee has the power to ensure the pending legal challenge is resolved before Smith and Black face the death chamber.
“The Tennessee Constitution gives you the power to grant reprieves,” the attorneys write. “Whatever anyone might believe about executions, when carried out they are a statement of values. An execution says more about us as a society than it does about the person condemned.”
Without a reprieve, Smith and Black would be the only individuals executed under the new protocol before the court can determine its constitutionality—a fact the attorneys argue is arbitrary and unjust.
“We are not seeking undue delay,” they conclude. “We are seeking fairness.”
