Supreme Court to Revisit Death Penalty and Intellectual Disability

Wed Dec 10 2025 11:34:48 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

The Supreme Court is set to hear a case that could redefine the criteria for executing individuals deemed intellectually disabled, focusing on Joseph Clifton Smith's borderline IQ scores.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will address a pivotal case involving Joseph Clifton Smith, a convicted murderer on death row in Alabama. The case debates whether individuals with borderline IQ scores can be deemed intellectually disabled, thus preventing their execution. Smith's IQ ranges between 72 and 78, raising questions about intelligence assessments and how to interpret them in legal contexts. Alabama argues that Smith hasn't shown his IQ is below 70, while disability advocacy groups emphasize a need for holistic evaluations beyond mere test scores. The outcome could impact many similar cases across the U.S.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is poised to hear an important case regarding the execution of convicted murderers. This case could establish new limitations on when individuals with intellectual disabilities can be spared from capital punishment.

The case revolves around Joseph Clifton Smith, who has been on death row in Alabama for over two decades. Smith’s defense team claims he is intellectually disabled because his IQ scores were documented to be between 72 and 78. These scores present a challenge to the established threshold of IQ 70, widely recognized as the defining criterion for intellectual disability.

During the Supreme Court's past rulings, there has been consistent emphasis on evaluating intellectual disability through a comprehensive lens, taking multiple factors into account rather than relying solely on numerical IQ scores.

Smith, convicted in 1997 for the murder of Durk Van Dam, faces a critical examination of how his borderline intellectual capacity is interpreted legally. Anxiety surrounding this case escalates considering a ruling in favor of Smith might establish a broader scope for assessing intellectual disabilities in criminal justice contexts.

Alabama's attorney general argues that Smith's scores do not meet the burden of proof that requires the court to classify him as intellectually disabled. In contrast, advocates for disability rights urge a more nuanced analysis that includes adaptive behavior and other life skills alongside IQ test results.

This Supreme Court session is anticipated not only for its immediate implications for Smith but also for the potential reverberations of its decision on future cases across the United States.