Washington, D.C. — On December 10, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Hamm v. Smith, a case that could fundamentally alter how courts assess intellectual disability in capital cases. The Center for American Progress released a new column laying out the stakes for disabled Americans.
Medical and disability experts have long emphasized that intellectual disability cannot be diagnosed by test scores alone and must incorporate evidence about adaptive behavior and early-life development. The ruling will determine whether judges must continue using a holistic, medically informed evaluation—as required under Atkins v. Virginia and Hall v. Florida—or whether states may rely almost exclusively on a series of IQ tests, a move that disability experts warn is scientifically unsound and legally dangerous.
“If the court allows states to rely on IQ scores alone, it will ignore science, undermine decades of disability rights protections, and dramatically increase the risk that people with intellectual disabilities are executed in violation of the Constitution,” said Mia Ives-Rublee, senior director for the Disability Justice Initiative at CAP and co-author of the column. “This case is about whether our justice system will uphold basic fairness and human dignity for disabled people.”
The outcome of Hamm v. Smith could shape how lower courts apply the death penalty nationwide and determine whether individuals with clinically documented intellectual disabilities receive constitutional protections from execution. A decision that narrows the evaluation framework would contradict medical consensus, conflict with prior Supreme Court rulings, and erode critical safeguards for disabled people in the criminal legal system.
Read the column: “The Supreme Court To Decide on How IQ Tests Can Affect the Death Penalty” by Hayley Durudogan, Mia Ives-Rublee, and Casey Doherty
For more information or to speak with an expert, please contact Christian Unkenholz at [email protected].