Neil Gorsuch Questions Constitutional Grounds in Death Penalty Case

Eighth Amendment and Atkins Precedent

• ⚖️ Justice Gorsuch pressed the Petitioner's attorney on the Eighth Amendment and the state court's request regarding the death penalty case.
• 💡 The discussion centered on the Atkins v. Virginia ruling, which established new ground regarding intellectual disability in capital cases.
• 📌 It was clarified that while states can be more lenient than the Supreme Court's requirements, a federal habeas court cannot grant relief based solely on a violation of state law.

Smith's Atkins Claim and State Law

• 🎯 The attorney confirmed that Smith has an Atkins claim, not a Perkins claim, and that Alabama is not more lenient than the precedents set by Atkins or Hall.
• ⚠️ Alabama is attempting to enforce the constitutional requirements, making it unlikely for the state to claim leniency beyond what the court mandates.

Interpreting Precedents on Intellectual Disability

• 🧠 Gorsuch inquired about the interpretation of precedents, specifically how states can implement the first prong of Atkins.
• ✅ The attorney suggested that states can implement prong one as they wish, provided they do not treat a single IQ score in the low 70s as decisive, nor use extraneous facts to outweigh a low score.
• 📊 A caveat was added: it's not just a low score in the low 70s, but a score within an error range, which can include 70 within its span, according to the APA's brief in Hall.