Supreme Court Weighs Life-or-Death Case for Alabama Death Row Inmate

Wed Dec 10 2025 08:54:18 GMT+0200 (Eastern European Standard Time)

A pivotal Supreme Court case on the intellectual disability of convicted murderer Joseph Clifton Smith could determine if he faces execution despite his borderline IQ scores. The outcome could change how states evaluate similar cases in the future.

The Supreme Court is reviewing the case of Joseph Clifton Smith, a death row inmate whose intellectual disability status is under scrutiny due to varying IQ test scores. The case raises critical questions about how states assess mental capacity in capital punishment cases, with implications for future determinations of eligibility for execution. Alabama is appealing lower court rulings that have found Smith to be intellectually disabled, which would preclude his execution under a precedent set in 2002.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court will hear arguments Wednesday in a case that could make it harder for convicted murderers to prove they should be spared from execution due to intellectual disabilities.

The high court is reviewing an appeal from Alabama, which is seeking to execute Joseph Clifton Smith, a 55-year-old inmate found by lower federal courts to be intellectually disabled.

In a landmark 2002 ruling, the Supreme Court prohibited the execution of intellectually disabled individuals, establishing a significant legal precedent.

Smith has spent nearly half his life on death row after being convicted for the 1997 murder of Durk Van Dam by beating him with a hammer. The core issue in this case revolves around Smith’s IQ tests, which have varied between 72 and 78. The accepted threshold for intellectual disability is an IQ of 70 or below.

Smith's defense highlights his educational struggles, stating that he was in learning-disabled classes and functioning at a very low academic level at the time of the crime.

The Supreme Court has clarified in previous rulings that states should take into account more than just IQ test results when assessing claims of intellectual disability, especially when scores hover around the threshold.

Alabama's Attorney General argued that Smith has not definitively demonstrated that his IQ falls below the requisite level, indicating a need for precise criteria in evaluating borderline cases. The Trump administration and 20 states support Alabama's stance, asserting that Smith did not meet the burden of proof for being classified as intellectually disabled.

In contrast, rights advocates argue that using IQ scores alone to diagnose intellectual disability is flawed and does not account for the full picture of a person’s cognitive abilities.

The outcome of this Supreme Court case could influence how similar cases are evaluated across the country, potentially impacting many individuals facing capital punishment.