CW: Murder
The Supreme Court is weighing how important IQ tests are in determining a person’s intellectual disability in order to avoid execution. This case concerns a death-row inmate named Joseph Clifton Smith, from Alabama, convicted of murdering a man in 1997. Since being in prison, Smith has been shown to have an IQ range of between 72 and 78, which is above the characteristic 70. His attorneys believe that in assessing his intellectual abilities, he qualified as intellectually disabled. This led lower courts to agree that Smith should be imprisoned for life rather than being executed.
Alabama, however, maintains that it can only consider a certain cut-off point of 70 or lower, without a margin of error or other considerations being taken into account. The medical community, as well as other professional bodies such as the American Psychological Association, advises that this should not be done. This is because there is a standard error range, and a score of 72 could genuinely be 69.
This debate follows in the tradition of the historic Atkins vs. Virginia decision in 2002, in which the Supreme Court declared, in a 6-3 decision, that executing individuals with intellectual disability constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, in violation of the Eighth Amendment of the Constitution. Although this decision was a significant step forward in protecting individuals with intellectual disability from execution, it was left to individual states to set their own definition of this group. In other words, when Atkins was decided, 18 of 38 states that used the death penalty excluded intellectually disabled individuals from execution.
The implications are far from limited to matters of Smith’s own appeal. Estimates suggest that as many as 20 percent of those presently residing on death row may be intellectually disabled. A decision that adopts a holistic analysis would provide a pathway to challenge for many, whereas being aligned with Alabama’s inflexible line in this matter would merely constrict.
Since Atkins vs. Virginia, it has been unlawful for intellectually disabled people to be executed as a form of cruel and unusual punishment. This upcoming Supreme Court decision will help reveal how this policy will be implemented. This decision, which will be made by next June, will affect not only Smith but also how intellectually disabled people are treated in this country when it comes to standardized testing.
Sources:
Blume, John H., et al. Of Atkins and Men: Deviations from Clinical Definitions of Mental Retardation in Death Penalty Cases. Cornell Law Faculty Publications, 1 Apr. 2009, https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=facpub
Dwyer, Devin. “Supreme Court Weighs Role of IQ Scores in Debate over Execution of Disabled People.” ABC News, ABC News Network, 10 Dec. 2025, abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/supreme-court-weighs-role-iq-scores-debate-execution/story?id=128146026. .
Mossman, Douglas. “Atkins v. Virginia: A Psychiatric Can of Worms.” Faculty Articles and Other Publications, no. 21, 2003, University of Cincinnati College of Law, https://scholarship.law.uc.edu/fac_pubs/21.