Supreme Court Narrowly Spares Alabama Killer From Execution

The US Supreme Court has narrowly spared an Alabama death row inmate from execution, leaving in place a lower court ruling that found he is intellectually disabled and therefore protected from capital punishment under the Constitution.

Get today's headlines by email

In a 5-4 decision on Thursday, the justices dismissed an appeal from Alabama officials seeking to reinstate the death sentence of Joseph Clifton Smith, who was convicted of first-degree murder in a 1997 robbery killing.

The court did not provide a full explanation for its ruling.

Dispute over IQ scores

The case centred on whether Smith met the legal standard for intellectual disability, which the Supreme Court ruled more than two decades ago bars the execution of people convicted of capital crimes under the Eighth Amendment’s ban on “cruel and unusual” punishment.

Smith had taken five IQ tests over nearly 40 years, recording scores of 75 in 1979, 74 in 1982, 72 in 1998, 78 in 2014 and 74 in 2017.

Alabama argued that only scores of 70 or below should qualify someone as intellectually disabled and said Smith’s results did not meet that threshold. State lawyers maintained that the Constitution did not prevent his execution for the murder of Durk Van Dam.

Medical groups, however, have long advised courts to assess intellectual disability using a broader evaluation that includes practical and social functioning, rather than relying solely on IQ test scores. They also note that such tests include margins of error, meaning Smith’s 72 score could effectively fall below 70.

Two lower federal courts concluded that Smith’s intellectual functioning, combined with school records and behavioural history, showed he was intellectually disabled.

Court documents said Smith had been classified at school as “Educable Mentally Retarded” in seventh grade and consistently performed below his expected grade level before later dropping out. He also alleged he suffered physical and verbal abuse during childhood.

Split among the justices

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote separately to say the court was not in a position to establish a broader legal standard for weighing multiple IQ scores.

She said courts should continue to assess such cases individually, guided by precedent and medical expertise.

“If a conflict among the states or lower courts emerges and a case properly presents the issue, it may be appropriate for this court to weigh in with more specific guidance,” Sotomayor wrote.

Four conservative justices dissented from the decision. Justice Samuel Alito, joined by Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Chief Justice John Roberts, criticised the majority for declining to clarify the law.

“The court shies away from its obligation to provide workable rules for capital cases,” Alito wrote.

Thomas separately argued that the constitutional ban on executing intellectually disabled offenders should be reconsidered.

Broader death penalty debate

The ruling leaves unresolved how courts should interpret differing IQ test results in death penalty cases, an issue that continues to divide states and lower courts.

According to the Death Penalty Information Center, as many as 20% of the roughly 2,100 people on death row in the United States may have some degree of intellectual disability.

Smith’s death sentence will now remain blocked, and he is expected to spend the rest of his life in prison.

Join the discussion?

Already a member?

Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 22 May 2026