Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could make it harder for convicted murderers to show their lives should be spared because they are intellectually disabled.
Background
The case centers on Joseph Clifton Smith, 55, who has spent roughly half his life on death row after being convicted of beating a man to death in 1997.
Smith’s five IQ tests produced scores ranging from 72 to 78, just above the 70 threshold that Alabama law uses to define intellectual disability.
At the time of the crime, Smith performed math at a kindergarten level, spelled at a third‑grade level and read at a fourth‑grade level, according to his lawyers.
Legal Context
Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall said Smith hasn’t met his burden of showing an IQ of 70 or below, and the state wrote in its brief that the discussion of a holistic approach is an unjustified expansion of the Supreme Court rulings.
The state argues that picking and choosing scores at the bottom of the range is not how the court will ultimately decide, as Marshall said in a phone interview.
President Donald Trump’s administration and 20 states support Alabama, with Solicitor General D. John Sauer writing that Smith “did not meet his burden of proving his IQ was likely 70 or below.”
Smith’s lawyers counter that lower courts followed the law by conducting a “holistic assessment of all relevant evidence” in a borderline IQ case.
Rights groups focused on disabilities filed a brief supporting Smith, writing that “intellectual disability diagnoses based solely on IQ test scores are faulty and invalid.”
The Supreme Court prohibited execution of intellectually disabled people in a landmark ruling in 2002 and has held in cases in 2014 and 2017 that states should consider other evidence of disability in borderline cases because of the margin of error in IQ tests.
State and Federal Positions
Alabama appealed to the Supreme Court after lower courts ruled that Smith is intellectually disabled.
The justices had previously sent his case back to the federal appeals court in Atlanta, where the judges affirmed that they had taken a “holistic” approach to Smith’s case, seemingly in line with the high court ruling.
But the justices said in June they would take a new look at the case.
Case Details
Smith was convicted and sentenced to death for the beating death of Durk Van Dam in Mobile County. Van Dam was found dead in his pickup truck. Prosecutors said he had been beaten to death with a hammer and robbed of $150, his boots and tools.
A federal judge in 2021 vacated Smith’s death sentence, though she acknowledged “this is a close case.”
Alabama law defines intellectual disability as an IQ of 70 or below, along with significant or substantial deficits in adaptive behavior and the onset of those issues before the age of 18.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court will decide whether Smith’s borderline IQ scores keep him on death row.
- Alabama argues the state’s holistic approach is an expansion of Supreme Court precedent.
- Rights groups and the federal judge see the IQ threshold as insufficient evidence of intellectual disability.
Conclusion
Chandler reported from Montgomery, Alabama. The upcoming hearing could shape how intellectual disability is applied in capital punishment cases across the country.
