ms. konrad: mr. chief justice and may it please the court. oklahoma chooses to execute our clients with a three-dug formula that includes a paralytic and potassium chloride, drugs that cause intense pain and suffering. the second and third drugs are constitutional. only if a prisoner will not feel the pain and be aware of the suffocation caused by those drugs. the district court erred as a matter of law and as a matter of fact when it found that medalazam as a this first drug is constitutionally tolerable. justice scalia: why is that a matter of law? as i see it, just a fact question, and the district court found that it did eliminate the pain do we do that kind of thing. ms. konrad: justice scalia there's a question of law and a question of fact. justice scalia: the question of law? ms. konrad: the question of law includes the district court found the three-drug formula was to bible in spite of medical consensus this drug can not be used as -- justice scalia: that's a question of fact. you're saying

ms. konrad: mr. wood was two hours -- justice sotomayor: i'm sorry two hours. now, there's been some defense that the 750 wasn't immediately delivered but it was still 750 that went into his system, and caused that kind of pain. correct? ms. konrad: yes, and our expert testified that mr. wood's execution demonstrates the ceiling effect, that giving more of this drug is not going to put a prisoner into a -- justice alito: how many executions have been carried out using this drug? ms. konrad: using midazolam. 15. justice alito: you're talking about one. ms. konrad: no, we're actually talking of several executions that -- the execution in this case in oklahoma that haven't happened a year ago of mr.locket, demonstrate why midazolam is does not put a prisoner in a coma. justice alito: i thought they were issues of the -- justice roberts: i thought there were issues of the administration of to the drugs, the nature of the veins and so forth. i got a different one in the locket case? ms. konrad: mr. chief

ms. konrad: mr. chief justice -- justice roberts: that was not then -- were there issues about -- i thought there were issues involve thing veins and the ability to make a intravenous connection. ms. konrad: there were problems with the catheter, but mr. lockett received enough miiidazolam and the executioner found he was unconscious and regained consciousness and that is the key issue. here -- justice scalia: not if he didn't receive the proper dosage. you're saying it's okay that he didn't receive the proper dosage so long as he was unconscious? ms. konrad: he received -- justice scalia: i don't see how that follows. if in fact the execution was not properly conducted, i don't see how you can blame it on the drug. ms. konrad: what we know about this drug, justice scalia, is that it can never paint the deep -- maintain the deep coma-like up consciousness necessary to prevent a prisoner from feeling the painful effects of this -- justice kagan: how do we know that? i thought that what we knew was som

ms. konrad: justice scalia there's a question of law and a question of fact. justice scalia: the question of law? ms. konrad: the question of law includes the district court found the three-drug formula was to bible in spite of medical consensus this drug can not be used as -- justice scalia: that's a question of fact. you're saying -- the question of law is that the district court ignored two facts. ignoring two facts dot not make it's question of law.