Supreme Court Strikes Down Florida’s Strict IQ Cutoff for Death Penalty

On May 27, the U.S. Supreme Court held in Hall v. Florida that Florida’s strict IQ cut­off for deter­min­ing intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty in cap­i­tal cas­es is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al. The Court con­clud­ed, ​“Florida’s law con­tra­venes our Nation’s com­mit­ment to dig­ni­ty and its duty to teach human decen­cy as the mark of a civilized world.” 

In 2002, the Court banned the exe­cu­tion of peo­ple with ​“men­tal retar­da­tion,” but allowed states lee­way in select­ing a process for deter­min­ing who would qual­i­fy for that exemp­tion. According to Florida’s Supreme Court, defen­dants with an IQ even one point above 70 can­not be con­sid­ered intel­lec­tu­al­ly dis­abled, even though most states allow for a mar­gin of error in such tests. 

The Supreme Court’s rul­ing stat­ed that Florida’s strict rule ​“dis­re­gards estab­lished med­ical prac­tice” and not­ed that the ​“vast major­i­ty of states” reject­ed such a nar­row inter­pre­ta­tion of IQ scores. The Court held that, ​“When a defen­dan­t’s IQ test score falls with­in the test’s acknowl­edged and inher­ent mar­gin of error, the defen­dant must be able to present addi­tion­al evi­dence of intel­lec­tu­al dis­abil­i­ty, includ­ing tes­ti­mo­ny regard­ing adaptive deficits.” 

Hall will receive a new hear­ing on his intel­lec­tu­al disability claim.