Cruel and unusual? Supreme Court wants new ruling in case involving convicted murderer with low IQ
WASHINGTON − The Supreme Court on Monday declined to review whether a convicted murder’s intellectual disability is severe enough that he can’t be executed, directing a lower court to first clarify its opinion.
That decision came over the objections of Justice Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch, who said they would have agreed to Alabama’s request that the court review that opinion and potentially revisit past decisions on how states must evaluate intellectual disabilities to avoid cruel and unusual punishment.
The Alabama Board of Corrections said an appeals court “bent law and logic” when ruling the state can’t execute Joseph Clifton Smith, whose IQ is in the 70s.
Alabama asked the Supreme Court to reverse that decision and, if necessary, reconsider past rulings on how states must evaluate intellectual disabilities to avoid violating the Constitution.
Fourteen other states with Republican attorneys general also urged the Supreme Court to get involved, arguing the Eighth Amendment’s protections against excessive punishments have taken on a “roving commission” that “forces judges to act as sociologists and determine what they think runs afoul of the evolving standards decency.”
That has eroded states’ ability to fight crime, the states said.
An IQ below 70
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that executing someone with an intellectual disability violates the 8th Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. Later decisions in 2014 and 2016 faulted Florida and Texas for how they evaluated the disability.
Alabama law defines intellectual disability as an IQ of 70 or below, “significant or substantial deficits in adaptive behavior” and the onset of those qualities before age 18.
Smith’s IQ scores have ranged from 72 to 78.
The Alabama Board of Corrections argues the lower courts relied solely on the lowest score and, given the standard range of error in IQ tests, said Smith’s score could be as low as 69.
Smith’s attorneys said the district judge considered additional evidence, including Smith’s behavioral skills. The Atlanta-based 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals court found that evaluation met the Supreme Court’s standards.
But Alabama asked the Supreme Court whether the appeals court was wrong and, if it wasn't, urged the justices to reconsider its standards.
In a brief order on Monday, the court said the appeals court's decision was unclear about whether it used a holistic approach to weighing the evidence about Smith's disability or relied primarily on his lowest-possible IQ score. That answer may determine whether the justices will want to review the decision, the court said in an unsigned opinion that vacated the appeals court's ruling and ordered a new one.
The opinion noted that the Supreme Court "has not specified how courts should evaluate multiple IQ scores."
On death row since 1997
Smith was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1997 murder of Durk Van Dam, who received 35 blunt force injuries and wounds from a saw on his neck, shoulder and back.
Senior U.S. District Judge Callie V. S. Granade called the evaluation of Smith’s mental functioning a “close case” but wrote “the evidence indicates that Smith’s intelligence and adaptive functioning has been deficient throughout his life.”
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: Supreme Court seeks to clarify whether low IQ bars execution of AL man
