The Supreme Court announced Monday that it will hear a death penalty case that will further define the standards of the punishment for mentally disabled individuals. Arguments in Hall v. Florida will be heard early in the new year. Narrowly, the case will explore the statistics involved with the IQ test, particularly, whether the margin of error is problematic enough to excuse certain criminals from the death penalty.
Thus far, the Supreme Court has ruled that the death penalty should not be applied to the mentally retarded, but left states open to defining the standards used to determine this sentencing. ?Previously, the Florida Supreme Court held that ?mental retardation? is defined as an IQ of 70 or less. Because Freddie Lee Hall tested at a 71, it is entirely possible that his IQ may actually fall below 70. Also at issue is whether the facts of Hall’s crime (abducting, raping, and killing a 21-year-old woman) outweigh his disability.
Furthermore, a decision that regulates how states must interpret the death penalty, with regard to the issue of mental ability, also opens the door to future decisions that restrict states? broad interpretation of the death penalty in all regards.
The result of this case ultimately rests on how the case is argued in terms of states? rights. Justice Kennedy, the court’s swing vote, has historically leaned with the liberal wing of the bench on death penalty cases. However, he is also sympathetic to states? rights arguments.
Most recently, Kennedy going so far as to rationalize his vote to overturn key parts of the Voting Rights Act in terms of states? rights. Shortly after gutting the Voting Rights Act, Kennedy then voted to place individual rights above states? rights in the cases that struck down DOMA and upheld same-sex marriage in California. It’s a battle in which states have thus far prevailed in developing harsh standards and burdens of proof, and Kennedy’s legal interpretation may once again set a key precedent.
Edited by SS
