Supreme Court spares life of convicted murderer with low IQ

[mahatmakanejeeves]

6. Thomas dissented separately to remind everyone he wants to (and would) write the 8th Amendment out of the Constitution.

Chris Geidner
‪@chrisgeidner.bsky.social‬

Thomas dissented separately to remind everyone that he wants to — and would — write the Eighth Amendment out of the Constitution.

‪Chris Geidner‬
‪@chrisgeidner.bsky.social‬
· 2h
Usually, we wouldn't know the vote in a DIG, but there are three writings accompanying the DIG in Hamm v. Smith.

Sotomayor, joined by Jackson, wrote a concurring opinion.

Alito wrote a dissent, joined by Thomas and partially joined by Roberts and Gorsuch.

Thomas also wrote his own dissent.

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE JACKSON joins,
concurring.
I concur in the Court’s decision to dismiss the writ of cer-
tiorari as improvidently granted. I write separately for two
reasons. First, based on the evidentiary record and how
this litigation proceeded below, I explain why the Court
should not and cannot use this case to address how courts
must analyze multiple IQ scores under Atkins v. Virginia,
536 U. S. 304 (2002). Second, I point out how the principal
dissent’s discussion of this Court’s precedents and the sci-
entific consensus about how courts should evaluate multi-
ple IQ scores is incomplete and potentially misleading.
ALT

ALITO, J., dissenting
* * *
The lower courts’ IQ analysis was flawed at every stage
of this litigation. Because the courts below have yet to pro-
vide a sound basis for granting Smith Atkins relief, the
Court should reverse the Eleventh Circuit’s decision and re-
mand this case for further proceedings.
ALT

THOMAS, J., dissenting
III
“Some of our most ‘egregious’ cases have been those in
which we have granted relief based on an unfounded Eighth
Amendment claim,” and Atkins is certainly near the top of
the list. Glossip v. Gross, 576 U. S. 863, 905–906 (2015)
(THOMAS, J., concurring). Atkins’s rejection of “the histori-
cal meaning of the [Eighth] Amendmen[t],” see Ramos, 590
U. S., at 106, has denied the justice governments have
given to murder victims from time immemorial, Glossip,
576 U. S., at 905–906 (THOMAS, J., concurring). And it de-
grades the mildly intellectually disabled by putting them
“on a level with . . . infants, imbeciles, and domestic ani-
mals”—those who cannot “‘have known better.’” C. S.
Lewis, The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment, 13 Issues
in Religion and Psychotherapy 147, 151 (1987); see Atkins,
536 U. S., at 318, 319–320. In a future case, the Court
should overrule Atkins and restore “the Cruel and Unusual
Punishments Clause’s fixed meaning in resolving any chal-
lenge brought under it.” Grants Pass, 603 U. S., at 562
(THOMAS, J., concurring). For now, I respectfully dissent.
ALT
10:47 AM · May 21, 2026

Thomas dissented separately to remind everyone that he wants to — and would — write the Eighth Amendment out of the Constitution.

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2026-05-21T14:47:11.577Z

Chris Geidner
‪@chrisgeidner.bsky.social‬

Usually, we wouldn't know the vote in a DIG, but there are three writings accompanying the DIG in Hamm v. Smith.

Sotomayor, joined by Jackson, wrote a concurring opinion.

Alito wrote a dissent, joined by Thomas and partially joined by Roberts and Gorsuch.

Thomas also wrote his own dissent.

JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE JACKSON joins,
concurring.
I concur in the Court’s decision to dismiss the writ of cer-
tiorari as improvidently granted. I write separately for two
reasons. First, based on the evidentiary record and how
this litigation proceeded below, I explain why the Court
should not and cannot use this case to address how courts
must analyze multiple IQ scores under Atkins v. Virginia,
536 U. S. 304 (2002). Second, I point out how the principal
dissent’s discussion of this Court’s precedents and the sci-
entific consensus about how courts should evaluate multi-
ple IQ scores is incomplete and potentially misleading.
ALT

ALITO, J., dissenting
* * *
The lower courts’ IQ analysis was flawed at every stage
of this litigation. Because the courts below have yet to pro-
vide a sound basis for granting Smith Atkins relief, the
Court should reverse the Eleventh Circuit’s decision and re-
mand this case for further proceedings.
ALT

THOMAS, J., dissenting
III
“Some of our most ‘egregious’ cases have been those in
which we have granted relief based on an unfounded Eighth
Amendment claim,” and Atkins is certainly near the top of
the list. Glossip v. Gross, 576 U. S. 863, 905–906 (2015)
(THOMAS, J., concurring). Atkins’s rejection of “the histori-
cal meaning of the [Eighth] Amendmen[t],” see Ramos, 590
U. S., at 106, has denied the justice governments have
given to murder victims from time immemorial, Glossip,
576 U. S., at 905–906 (THOMAS, J., concurring). And it de-
grades the mildly intellectually disabled by putting them
“on a level with . . . infants, imbeciles, and domestic ani-
mals”—those who cannot “‘have known better.’” C. S.
Lewis, The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment, 13 Issues
in Religion and Psychotherapy 147, 151 (1987); see Atkins,
536 U. S., at 318, 319–320. In a future case, the Court
should overrule Atkins and restore “the Cruel and Unusual
Punishments Clause’s fixed meaning in resolving any chal-
lenge brought under it.” Grants Pass, 603 U. S., at 562
(THOMAS, J., concurring). For now, I respectfully dissent.
ALT
10:33 AM · May 21, 2026

Usually, we wouldn't know the vote in a DIG, but there are three writings accompanying the DIG in Hamm v. Smith.

Sotomayor, joined by Jackson, wrote a concurring opinion.

Alito wrote a dissent, joined by Thomas and partially joined by Roberts and Gorsuch.

Thomas also wrote his own dissent.

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2026-05-21T14:33:44.044Z

Chris Geidner
‪@chrisgeidner.bsky.social‬

Here's the DIG and opinions: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/24-872_ec8f.pdf
www.supremecourt.gov
10:37 AM · May 21, 2026

Here's the DIG and opinions: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...

— Chris Geidner (@chrisgeidner.bsky.social) 2026-05-21T14:37:00.892Z