Plain-English summary
Court dismisses review of Alabama’s IQ proof rule in Atkins claims; case improvidently granted
The Court dismissed the writ of certiorari as improvidently granted, leaving in place the lower‑court posture and avoiding a national decision on whether a State may demand a showing of IQ of 70 or less by a preponderance of the evidence to prove intellectual disability under Atkins. Justices Sotomayor and Jackson concurred; Justice Thomas dissented.
Why this matters
The case raised a key procedural and substantive question about how defendants can prove intellectual disability to avoid the death penalty. A clear Supreme Court ruling could have set a uniform rule for how to weigh multiple IQ tests and what burden of proof states may impose. The DIG leaves open variation among states and circuits on how Atkins claims are proved and evaluated.
Who may feel it
- People facing the death penalty who raise intellectual disability (Atkins) claims
- State prison systems and prosecutors who defend death sentences
- Defense attorneys and forensic psychologists who evaluate intellectual disability
- Courts and judges handling Atkins claims
- Advocacy groups for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities