Published • loading... • Updated
Supreme Court dismisses Alabama’s bid to execute inmate with borderline intellectual disability
The justices left intact a ruling that Joseph Smith’s IQ scores and other evidence make him ineligible for execution, after 144 death sentences were vacated since 2002.
- On May 21, the Supreme Court declined to revisit the standard for when intellectual disability prevents execution, leaving in place a lower court ruling that renders convicted murderer Joseph Smith ineligible for the death penalty in Alabama.
- Smith, on death row for more than two decades, produced five IQ scores ranging from 72 to 78; lower courts noted error margins could place his score at or below 70. In 1997, while on work release, Smith beat Durk Van Dam to death, stealing tools and $140.
- The American Psychological Association and the American Psychiatric Association told the Court that IQ scores alone are insufficient for diagnosing intellectual disability. Since 2002, 144 death sentences have been vacated for such reasons.
- Justice Samuel Alito dissented, arguing the Court ignored its obligation to provide "workable rules," while Clarence Thomas urged overruling the 2002 precedent. Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted the Court lacked an adequate evidentiary record to provide guidance.
- The Justice Department, backed by Trump, argued that states have discretion in defining intellectual disability. Disability rights groups followed the case closely, noting implications for government services including health care and income support.
Insights by Ground AI
39 Articles
39 Articles
Hartford Courant+3 Reposted by 3 other sources
Supreme Court dismisses Alabama’s bid to execute inmate with borderline intellectual disability
A divided Supreme Court dismissed Alabama’s bid to execute a convicted murderer who was found by lower courts to be intellectually disabled.
·Hartford, United States
Read Full ArticleCoverage Details
Total News Sources39
Leaning Left9Leaning Right8Center18Last UpdatedBias Distribution51% Center
Bias Distribution
- 51% of the sources are Center
51% Center
L 26%
C 51%
R 23%
Factuality
To view factuality data please Upgrade to Premium
