Did DOJ Destroy the Special Counsel Audio Interview With Biden?
ISIS Terrorists Crossed Our Southern Border. Rand Paul and Lindsey Graham Are Demanding...
Senator Cotton Notices a Pattern With Russia and Democrats
WaPo Executive Editor Has Resigned. The Reason Behind It Isn't Hard to Figure...
Is It Fair to Say That Jimmy Carter Is Dead, But No One...
Jen Psaki Agrees to Transcribed Interview on Afghanistan Withdrawal, but There's Still a...
Here's How a Majority of 'Palestinians' Feel About a 'Two-State Solution'
Texas Gov. Abbott: Here's Proof 'Voter Fraud Is Real'
‘Savage Animal’: Republicans React to the Arrest of an Illegal Alien Charged With...
Biden Expects Us to Believe He Cares About 'One Flag. One America.'
A Month of Shame and Humiliation as the West Seeks to Appease the...
Palestinians Have Once Again Shown How the 'Two State Solution' Remains a Dangerous...
Biden’s Insane Title IX Regulations Will Not Take Effect in Several More States
Florida Police Intercept Illegal Immigration Attempt
Under New Biden Title IX Rule, the Government Could Take Your Kids
Tipsheet

Brumfield v. Cain: 5-4 Opinion Putting Off Death Penalty Because of a "Mental Disability"

Earlier Supreme Court decisions have decreed that individuals who are juveniles, mentally disturbed, or mentally disabled are ineligible for the death penalty. Today, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that Kevan Brumfield can have the Atkins claim considered in federal court because of his mental disability.

Advertisement

So what exactly is an Atkins claim? And how is this preventing Brumfield from facing the death penalty? (For now).

In 2002, it was decided in Atkins v. Virginia that:

Those mentally retarded persons who meet the law’s requirements for criminal responsibility should be tried and punished when they commit crimes. Because of their disabilities in areas of reasoning, judgment, and control of their impulses, however, they do not act with the level of moral culpability that characterizes the most serious adult criminal conduct.

The Argument for Brumfield: On March 30th, the Supreme Court held an hour oral argument determining if petitioner Brumfield was granted an Atkins trial. Brumfield filed on account that he was mentally retarded requesting funds to help develop this Atkins claim. With evidence that that he had an IQ of 75, the equivalent of a fourth grade reading level, had been prescribed numerous medications, and treated at psychiatric hospitals as a child; the Louisiana Supreme Court found that Brumfield did not have an Atkins hearing.

Advertisement

Today, however, it was established that because Brumfield was not granted an evidentiary hearing, or granting him the time or funding to provide proper evidence–he would be granted his Atkins claim in federal court.

Brumfield was convicted of murdering a Baton Rouge police officer in 1995.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement