On March 3, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in Hall v. Florida, a case addressing the strict standard for intellectual disability that Florida uses to determine if inmates are exempt from execution. Under the Court’s 2002 decision in Atkins v. Virginia, individuals with intellectual disabilities (mental retardation) are constitutionally barred from receiving the death penalty. The decision “le[ft] to the State[s] the task of developing appropriate ways to enforce the constitutional restriction,” resulting in various standards for determining intellectual disabilities across the states. Unlike almost all other states, Florida rigidly requires an IQ of 70 or below to demonstrate mental retardation, with no allowance for the test’s margin of error. Freddie Hall, the death-row petitioner in this case, was first diagnosed with intellecutal disabilities in elementary school. Prior to the Atkins, a Florida court determined that “Freddie Lee Hall has been mentally retarded his entire life.” Despite these findings, Hall is still facing execution. Cornell Law Professor John Blume said, while the issue is limited, the case is important, “to make clear that states cannot narrow a categorical ban created by the Supreme Court intended to protect a vulnerable group from wrongful execution.”

(J. Blume, “Hall v. Florida: Florida’s Attempt to Limit Atkins’ Constitutional Protection,” American Constitution Society Blog, February 20, 2014). See U.S. Supreme Court and Intellectual Disability.

TAGS