(NewsNation) — The U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments Wednesday about the role of multiple IQ test scores in determining whether a prisoner is intellectually disabled and, potentially, barred from execution.
The justices will be deciding Hamm v. Smith, where Joseph Clifton Smith, convicted of capital murder in Alabama and sentenced to death, has taken five IQ tests as an adult. His scores range from 72 to 78.
Those numbers are near the recognized range for a “significant limitation in intellectual functioning” of 70 to 75, according to the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
The state of Alabama has appealed to the court to deem Smith fit for execution, citing scores consistently above 70.
Currently, prisoners with intellectual disabilities are barred from execution under the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits “cruel and unusual punishment.”
Alabama argues that execution is constitutional
Alabama’s principal deputy solicitor general Robert Overing argued IQ scores should remain the main marker used by courts to assess intellectual disability and that Smith fell under that standard.
He further argued that states have been given “leeway” in “defining intellectual disability” under the Eighth Amendment. Overing also urged the justices to give heed to the criminal justice system that determined Smith fit for execution.
“The court should remember this is not just about state sovereignty but to preserve jury function to make assessment of criminals and crime,” he said.
Smith’s attorneys say state failed in making a complete assessment of disability
Smith’s attorneys pushed for the court to consider additional evidence to determine his eligibility.
The evaluation for disability must be broadened with more factors other than IQ tests, attorney Harry Graver, arguing for Smith, told the justices.
These can include adaptive functioning and other psychometric assessments, he said.
Graver argued that while the lower court did take these into consideration for Smith, they did not assess them under the proper standards and with greater weight.
Justices press about state law and the Eighth Amendment
The justices’ determination in Hamm v. Smith could redefine intellectual disability in courtrooms across the nation.
In 2002, the Supreme Court ruled in Atkins v. Virginia that the amendment’s wording included the execution of those who are intellectually disabled.
In other cases — such as 2014’s Hall v. Florida and 2017’s Moore v. Texas — the high court affirmed states should consider other evidence of disability, as IQ tests have a margin of error.
The justices relied heavily on these cases, asking both sides to reconcile Smith’s case with precedent.