Hamm v. Smith

The case involves Alabama death-row inmate Joseph Clifton Smith, who was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death. Smith argued that his intellectual disability barred execution under Atkins v. Virginia. Alabama courts rejected his claim, applying a state standard that defense lawyers said ignored current medical consensus. The State of Alabama, represented by Corrections Commissioner John Q. Hamm, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review whether the lower courts erred. On November 4, 2024, the Supreme Court heard oral argument. The central question was whether the Eighth Amendment requires courts to use contemporary medical standards when assessing intellectual disability in capital cases, or whether states may rely on their own criteria. The outcome will determine whether Smith can be executed and set standards for similar death-penalty cases across the United States.

As of the November 4, 2024 oral argument, the Supreme Court had not yet issued a decision; the case remained pending.

The main dispute is whether the Eighth Amendment's ban on cruel and unusual punishment obligates state and federal courts to apply current medical diagnostic standards for intellectual disability in capital cases, and whether Alabama’s standard, which does not fully adopt such standards, is unconstitutional.

The case could reshape how death-penalty states assess intellectual disability claims, affecting numerous capital defendants and potentially halting or permitting executions based on updated medical criteria.