The Supreme Court is set to rule on Hamm v Smith, an Alabama death penalty case that centers on the execution of individuals with intellectual disabilities.

The case involves Joseph Smith, whom Alabama seeks to execute despite multiple IQ test scores ranging from 72 to 78, which place him in the bottom fifth percentile of the population. A federal court determined that Smith is intellectually disabled based on these IQ assessments and evaluations of his adaptive behaviors, which include social and practical skills used in daily life.

The legal precedent stems from the Supreme Court's 2002 Atkins v Virginia ruling, which established that executing individuals with intellectual disabilities violates the Constitution's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. Under this precedent, Alabama would be constitutionally prohibited from executing Smith if he is determined to be intellectually disabled.

The upcoming Supreme Court decision could have broader implications for how courts evaluate intellectual disability in death penalty cases. The ruling may affect the criteria and standards used to determine intellectual disability, potentially influencing similar cases nationwide.

Intellectual disability determinations in capital cases typically involve assessments of both cognitive functioning through IQ testing and adaptive behavior evaluations. The threshold and methods for these assessments have been subjects of ongoing legal debate in death penalty jurisprudence.