Supreme Court Dismisses Alabama’s Challenge on Death Penalty Eligibility
The US Supreme Court on Thursday dismissed a challenge by the state of Alabama to a judicial finding that Joseph Clifton Smith, a death row inmate convicted of a 1997 murder, is intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for the death penalty under the US Constitution.
In an unusual move, the court issued a single-sentence, unsigned order dismissing Alabama’s petition for review in Hamm v Smith without deciding the merits. This action effectively reversed the court’s earlier decision to hear an appeal by state officials concerning the method used by a lower court to determine Smith’s intellectual disability and his consequent exemption from execution.
Key Issue: Assessing IQ Scores and Intellectual Disability
The central issue involved how courts should evaluate multiple IQ scores that fall both above and below the cutoff for execution eligibility, and the extent to which courts should consider additional evidence of intellectual capacity beyond IQ scores. Had the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Alabama, it would have increased the number of individuals with intellectual disabilities—who are constitutionally protected from execution—subject to capital punishment.
After hearing oral arguments in December, the majority ruled on procedural grounds that the court should not have accepted Smith’s case. Smith, a man convicted of capital murder, will thus remain protected by the lower court’s ruling that blocks his execution.
Justices’ Positions on the Dismissal
Liberal justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson concurred with the decision to dismiss the case. Conservative justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented, with Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Neil Gorsuch joining Alito’s dissent in part.
Justice Sotomayor expressed agreement with the lower court’s determination that Smith has "significantly subaverage intellectual functioning and is intellectually disabled," describing it as "correct, or at least, very plausible."
“The court is not equipped to provide any meaningful guidance on how courts should assess multiple IQ scores,” Sotomayor stated. “That is because the differences between methods used to assess multiple IQ scores raise complicated questions on which even experts may disagree.
“If a conflict among the states or lower courts emerges and a case properly presents the issue, it may be appropriate for this court to weigh in with more specific guidance about the permissible method or methods by which courts must analyze such scores,” she added.
Constitutional Protections and State Standards
The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling prohibits executing intellectually disabled individuals under the Eighth Amendment’s ban on "cruel and unusual punishment." However, the ruling left it to individual states to establish standards for determining eligibility.
Previous Supreme Court decisions in 2014 and 2017 allowed courts to consider IQ score ranges near 70 alongside other evidence of intellectual disability, such as testimony regarding "adaptive deficits."
Smith’s IQ Scores and Evidence of Disability
Smith’s five IQ scores, which assess learning, reasoning, and problem-solving abilities, range from 78 to 72—placing him near the bottom fifth percentile of the population. In Alabama, a person is ineligible for execution if they have an IQ score at or below 70 and can demonstrate "significant deficits" in everyday skills manifesting before age 18. Many other states apply similar criteria.
A federal judge in the 11th Circuit noted that Smith’s lowest IQ score could be as low as 69 when accounting for the standard error of measurement. This allowed Smith to present additional evidence regarding his mental capacity. The judge found that Smith exhibited significant deficits in adaptive behaviors and that these problems manifested early in life, affecting his social and interpersonal skills, independent living, and schooling.
Smith’s school records indicated he was classified as "educable mentally retarded" in seventh grade, an outdated term referring to mild intellectual disability. The court also considered other factors, including Smith’s inability to maintain a bank account and difficulties with grocery shopping.
“A person with an IQ score above 70 may have such severe adaptive behavior problems ... that the person’s actual functioning is comparable to that of individuals with a lower IQ score,” the court found, concluding that Smith could not be sentenced to death.
An appeals court upheld this ruling, noting that the decision was made using a holistic approach.
Alabama’s Appeals and Federal Support
Alabama contested the lower court’s decision, arguing it placed excessive weight on Smith’s lowest IQ score, which only fell below the cutoff when considering the margin of error. The state appealed twice to the US Supreme Court, asserting that more weight should be given to Smith’s cumulative IQ scores, which were above the cutoff.
The state’s position was supported by the Trump administration, which had lifted a moratorium on the federal death penalty in this case.
