Hamm v. Smith · ¶25

The Court is not equipped in this case to provide any meaningful guidance on how courts should assess multiple IQ scores. All the parties here agree that the Eighth Amendment does not prescribe a single formula for weighing multiple IQ scores. All the parties also agree that Atkins gave States the primary role in “developing appropriate ways to enforce” Atkins. 536 U. S., at 317. Although the parties offer to this Court a variety of approaches to assessing multiple IQ scores that States could adopt, the litigation below did not focus on whether a precise methodology exists that courts must use. Without the benefit of an evidentiary record or decisions below trained on the specific theories now advanced by the parties, this Court rightly concludes that it should not provide more detailed guidance beyond what this Court's cases have previously said.

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