WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is slated to hear arguments this Wednesday regarding a case that could complicate the ability of convicted murderers to prove they should not be executed due to intellectual disability.
At the heart of this legal dispute is the case of Joseph Clifton Smith from Alabama. Smith, who has been on death row for approximately half his life, was found by lower federal courts to be intellectually disabled and thus should be protected from execution.
This case is particularly challenging due to Smith's multiple IQ test scores, which all hover just above the widely accepted marker of 70 for intellectual disability. His scores ranged from 72 to 78, prompting discussions about the implications of borderline IQ results.
Smith, who was placed in learning-disabled classes and dropped out of school in the seventh grade, demonstrated low operational skills at the time of the crime, performing math at a kindergarten level and reading at a fourth-grade level.
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that the execution of intellectually disabled individuals is unconstitutional, and the justices have since reiterated that states should consider multiple factors beyond strict IQ scores when making determinations for borderline cases.
In the 2014 and 2017 cases, the court emphasized the importance of a ‘holistic’ approach, which Alabama is now contesting. Attorney General Steve Marshall claims that Smith's scores in the seventies do not meet the necessary criteria for proving intellectual disability.
In support of Alabama's stance, the Trump administration and 20 other states have filed briefs asserting that Smith fails to demonstrate that his IQ is likely below 70. Conversely, advocacy groups for individuals with disabilities claim that relying solely on IQ tests is inadequate and leads to flawed assessments of intellectual disability.
Smith's original conviction stemmed from the violent beating death of Durk Van Dam in Mobile County in 1997, a crime for which Smith was sentenced to death.
As the court prepares to review the case, it will weigh the definitions of intellectual disability against the disparate IQ scores and the implications of a holistic interpretation in legal contexts.
