Hamm v. Smith · ¶134

The undeniable thrust of this analysis is that a 70-IQ cutoff is constitutional, provided that courts consider measurement error when applying it. If that were not so—if a 70-IQ cutoff could never be dispositive of an Atkins claim—then Hall could not have held that Florida's statute was “consisten[t] with Atkins.” 572 U. S., at 711. Hall thus clarified that the Eighth Amendment does not bar the death penalty when a defendant fails to prove that his IQ is 70 or below. This conclusion cohered with Atkins, which keyed its holding to a purported “national consensus” against “execut[ing] offenders possessing a known IQ less than 70.” 536 U. S., at 316.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.