Supreme Court leaves Atkins protections intact in Alabama death row case
Rule ChangesJustices dismiss Hamm v. Smith, declining to tell lower courts how to weigh multiple IQ scores in capital cases
May 21st, 2026: Court dismisses the case as improvidently grantedNew here? Follow stories to track developments over time. Create a free account to get updates when stories you care about change.
Overview
Updated May 21Joseph Clifton Smith has been on Alabama's death row since 1997. His five IQ tests came back at 72, 74, 74, 75, and 78. On Thursday, the Supreme Court dismissed Alabama's appeal in Hamm v. Smith, letting stand a lower-court finding that Smith is intellectually disabled and cannot be executed.
The dismissal locks in a more protective reading of the Court's 2002 Atkins ruling for borderline cases. States hoping for a stricter test, one that would treat any IQ score above 70 as disqualifying an Atkins claim, did not get one.
Why it matters
Roughly 20 percent of capital defendants have IQs near the disability threshold, and the rule courts use to weigh their scores decides who lives.
Questions about this story
Free account needed to ask — your question is kept and asked for you right after sign-up. Answers are public.
No questions yet — be the first to ask.
Key Indicators
Voices
Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.
Play
Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.
Higher or Lower
A number from this story, against one from elsewhere in the news — guess which is bigger, then keep the chain going. 5 rounds, 3 strikes; a miss costs a strike and resets your streak.
Keyboard: ↓/L lower · ↑/H higher
0 points — sign up to put that on the leaderboard.
Timeline
Order five events from this story, oldest at top. Each in the right slot scores 1 — neighbours within one slot count too. Your previous result — green ✓ for exact slots, yellow ~ for off by one. Cards now in true chronological order.
Sign up to save your score and track a streak across stories.
Connections
Sixteen names from the news. Find the four hidden groups of four. Four mistakes max.
Sign up to keep a daily streak — a new puzzle lands every day.
Exit debate?
Your progress in this debate will be lost.
- 1 Two AI personas square off on this story.
- 2 You predict who'll win each round — correct picks earn XP.
- 3 One crossfire question is yours to fire. Pick it carefully.
Couldn't generate a topic
Select Your Champions
Choose one persona for each side of the debate
DEBATE TOPIC
Choose personas with different perspectives for a more dynamic debate.
Select debater for this side:
No debate personas available right now.
Select debater for this side:
No debate personas available right now.
Who's Got This Round?
Make your prediction before the referee scores
The referee scores both sides on
Round Results
Set the Crossfire
Pick the question both personas must answer in the final round
Debate Oracle! You called every round!
Sharp Instincts! You know your debaters!
The Coin Flip Strategist! Perfectly balanced!
The Contrarian! Bold predictions!
Inverse Genius! Try betting the opposite next time!
XP Breakdown
Prediction History
People Involved
Organizations Involved
The nine-justice court that took the case in June 2025, heard argument in December, then walked away in May.
The state agency that holds Smith and brought the appeal in Commissioner Hamm's name.
The Atlanta-based appeals court whose ruling for Smith now stands.
Timeline
1997 May 2026
-
Court dismisses the case as improvidently granted
Latest Supreme Court RulingFive justices vote to walk away. Alito writes a 24-page dissent. Thomas writes separately to call for overruling Atkins. Smith's execution is permanently barred.
-
Oral arguments held
Supreme CourtJustices question how to combine five IQ scores into a single number and whether the Eleventh Circuit's holistic test conflicts with Hall and Moore.
-
Supreme Court grants certiorari
ProceduralThe Court agrees to hear Alabama's renewed appeal after the Eleventh Circuit again rules for Smith on remand.
-
Supreme Court first remands Hamm v. Smith
Supreme Court RulingIn an earlier round, the Court vacates an Eleventh Circuit decision and remands for further consideration of how the lower court treated Smith's multiple IQ scores.
-
District court finds Smith intellectually disabled
LegalA federal district judge rules Smith meets the Atkins standard, citing measurement error on his lowest score and substantial adaptive deficits.
-
Moore v. Texas requires current medical standards
Supreme Court RulingThe Court rejects Texas's use of outdated and non-clinical factors to assess intellectual disability, demanding that current medical standards guide Atkins claims.
-
Hall v. Florida narrows the IQ cutoff
Supreme Court RulingThe Court strikes down Florida's rigid IQ-70 bright line, holding that states must account for the standard error of measurement when scores are near the threshold.
-
Atkins v. Virginia decided
Supreme Court RulingThe Supreme Court rules 6-3 that the Eighth Amendment bars executing intellectually disabled defendants. States are left to define how disability is measured.
-
Smith convicted of capital murder
LegalAn Alabama jury convicts Joseph Clifton Smith for beating Durk Van Dam to death in Mobile County. The trial court accepts the jury recommendation and sentences him to death.
Historical Context
3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.
Atkins v. Virginia (2002)
Daryl Atkins was sentenced to die in Virginia for a 1996 abduction and murder. His IQ measured 59. The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that executing the intellectually disabled violates the Eighth Amendment, citing an emerging national consensus across state legislatures.
Atkins's own death sentence was vacated. Dozens of death row prisoners filed new Atkins claims in the months that followed.
Atkins set the constitutional floor that Hamm v. Smith was litigated against. States, not the Court, were given the task of defining intellectual disability, which set up the borderline-IQ disputes that have followed.
Every multiple-IQ-score fight, including Smith's, exists because Atkins drew a line but did not draw a number. The Court declined again to draw that number this week.
Hall v. Florida (2014)
Florida had treated any IQ score above 70 as automatically disqualifying an Atkins claim. Freddie Lee Hall, sentenced to die for a 1978 murder, scored as low as 71 on some tests. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that Florida's bright line ignored the standard error of measurement.
Hall's case was sent back for fuller consideration of his disability. Florida and a handful of other states had to rewrite their Atkins procedures.
Hall established that an IQ near 70 must be read as a range, not a point. That principle is exactly what the Eleventh Circuit applied to Smith's lowest score of 72.
Alabama's argument in Hamm v. Smith was, in effect, that Hall should not stretch to cover scores in the mid-70s. The dismissal leaves Hall's logic in force for those cases.
Moore v. Texas (2017 and 2019)
Texas was using a set of non-clinical factors, drawn from the fictional character Lennie in Of Mice and Men, to assess intellectual disability. Bobby James Moore had scored as low as 57 on IQ tests. The Supreme Court twice told Texas to use current medical standards instead.
Moore was resentenced to life without parole. Texas was forced to abandon its homegrown test.
Moore made clear that states cannot improvise their own definitions of intellectual disability. Current clinical standards control.
Together with Hall, Moore framed the Eleventh Circuit's approach in Smith's case. The dismissal in Hamm v. Smith means that framework is not being narrowed.
