US Supreme Court wrestles with death row inmate's intellectual disability ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday heard arguments over Alabama’s attempt to execute Joseph Clifton Smith, a death row inmate convicted of a 1997 murder. A lower court had ruled that Smith is intellectually disabled and therefore ineligible for the death penalty.

The Republican-led state of Alabama appealed the decision, which was based on IQ test scores and expert testimony. The Trump administration has joined Alabama in supporting the appeal.

Smith, now 55, was convicted for the fatal beating of Durk Van Dam in Mobile County, Alabama. According to court records, Smith killed Van Dam with a hammer and a saw to steal his boots, tools, and $140. Van Dam’s body was found in his mud-bound Ford Ranger truck in a remote wooded area.

Under a 2002 Supreme Court ruling, executing an intellectually disabled person is unconstitutional under the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The current case focuses on how courts should weigh multiple IQ test scores when evaluating intellectual disability claims.

Alabama attorney Robert Overing argued that lower courts gave too much weight to defense evidence that downplayed Smith’s higher IQ scores. “Here, every identified method of handling multiple IQ scores favors the conclusion that Smith is not intellectually disabled,” Overing told the justices, describing IQ as “the fruit of a multi-century enterprise to figure out the best possible estimate of intelligence.”

Some justices questioned Overing’s argument. Liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson said, “I think what you’ve done is shift this to be all about the IQ test in a way that is not supported by our case law.”

Alabama, like many states, considers an IQ of 70 or below as evidence of intellectual disability. Supreme Court rulings in 2014 and 2017 allowed courts to consider scores near 70 along with other evidence, such as deficits in adaptive skills.

Smith had five IQ test scores ranging from 72 to 78. A federal judge noted that his lowest score could be as low as 69, accounting for the standard error of measurement. The judge also found that Smith had significant deficits from a young age in social skills, independent living, and academics.

Defense lawyer Seth Waxman said the lower court’s assessment aligns with the approach used in other states with the death penalty. “If there are multiple scores whose SEM ranges individually reach 70 or below, you consider other evidence that is relevant to intellectual functioning,” he said.

Conservative Justice Samuel Alito questioned the idea of a national consensus. “How are we to determine what the national consensus is based on state court decisions that have struggled, that are struggling, to understand what this court has said?” he asked.

In 2023, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the lower court’s findings, setting aside Smith’s death sentence. Alabama subsequently filed an appeal with the Supreme Court. Last year, the Supreme Court sent the case back, asking for clarification on the lower court’s handling of IQ scores. The 11th Circuit clarified that it used a “holistic approach” considering multiple IQ scores and expert testimony.

Trump administration lawyer Harry Graver argued that the lower court failed to properly weigh the evidence. “Even if you look at other evidence beyond IQ scores, you still need to circle back and see how that weighs against the evidence on the other side of the scale,” he said.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling by the end of June. -John Kruzel/Reuters