Lots of Rahimi GVRs and a curious GVR in long-simering Eighth Amendment capital eligibility case in new SCOTUS order list
The Supreme Court is back in action this week, and this morning it released this notable new order list. The start and end of the list will be of greatest interest for criminal justice fans. At the start, we get seven GVRs of criminal cases from four different circuits needing “further consideration in light of United States v. Rahimi, 602 U. S. ___ (2024).” I am not sure of the specifics of all these cases, but I am sure the Rahimi Second Amendment churn and uncertainty is not concluding anytime soon.
What is concluding, though, is uncertainty about what the Justices are doing with Hamm v Smith, a case the Court had relisted more than 25 times, I believe. (This recent post noted some recent speculation about the case.) At the end of today’ order list we find a two-page per curiam order sending the case back to the Elevent Circuit. Here is how it starts and ends:
Joseph Clifton Smith was sentenced to death for the murder of Durk Van Dam. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama vacated Smith’s death sentence after concluding that he is intellectually disabled. See Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U. S. 304 (2002). Smith has obtained five full-scale IQ scores, ranging from 72 to 78. Smith’s claim of intellectual disability depended in part on whether his IQ is 70 or below. The District Court found that Smith’s IQ could be as low as 69 given the standard error of measurement for his lowest score of 72. The District Court then vacated the death sentence, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed…..
The Eleventh Circuit’s opinion is unclear on [its approach to multiple IQ scores], and this Court’s ultimate assessment of any petition for certiorari by the State may depend on the basis for the Eleventh Circuit’s decision. Therefore, we grant the petition for certiorari and Smith’s motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, vacate the judgment of the Eleventh Circuit, and remand the case for further consideration consistent with this opinion.
JUSTICE THOMAS and JUSTICE GORSUCH would grant the petition for a writ of certiorari and set the case for argument.
This GVR conclusion to this long-simmering case may only enhance speculation about what various Justices might have considered the right approach to the broader issues of the Eighth Amentment jurisprudence this case could raise. It will be quite intriguing to see what the Eleventh Circuit might do upon remand and what might come before SCOTUS thereafter.
For those interested in a bit more background, here is a new CNN article on the Hamm v. Smith disposition: “Supreme Court orders more review of Alabama’s request to execute inmate courts said is intellectually disabled.”