The Supreme Court hears arguments Wednesday in a Texas death penalty case that turns on a procedural question with wide reach. Dexter Johnson was convicted of the 2006 murder of 23-year-old Maria Aparece. Days before his scheduled May 2019 execution, his legal team raised an intellectual disability claim citing the 2013 DSM-5 update, which moved clinicians away from rigid IQ thresholds toward adaptive functioning. A federal court found merit and stayed the execution, and now the justices are weighing whether a federal court can consider a second or successive habeas petition at all.
The stakes stretch beyond this case. A ruling could shape how federal courts treat late-stage sentence challenges for years, and it touches the constitutional limits on executing people with intellectual disabilities. Ethan Nutter, who filed an amicus brief for the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, says Johnson meets the current definition. The Texas Department of Criminal Justice argues that for victims’ families, justice delayed is justice denied. A decision is expected by June 2027.
So what do you think? When the science changes, should the courts be allowed to take another look, even years later? Tell us on our Facebook page.
