Supreme Court Leaves Rulings on Executing the Intellectually Disabled in Place
The US Supreme Court upheld its previous rulings that individuals with intellectual disabilities should not face execution. The decision came in the case of Hamm v. Smith, where the court emphasized that IQ tests alone are insufficient for determining intellectual disability. Dissenting justices raised concerns about the implications of the ruling and the ongoing debates surrounding the death penalty and racial bias.
- ▪The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to dismiss the Hamm v. Smith case, reaffirming that people with intellectual disabilities should not be executed.
- ▪Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that the court is not equipped to provide guidance on assessing multiple IQ scores.
- ▪The state of Alabama argued that Joseph Clinton Smith could be executed despite his documented intellectual disability.
Mother Jones files mainly under politics. We currently carry 167 of its stories.
Story provenance
Source · retrieval · rights · ranking — open for full record
inspect →
Story provenance
Attribution is not the same as permission. This drawer separates discovery metadata, excerpts, WeSearch-generated summaries, reuse status, and whether the publisher receives the visit. Nothing here claims a legal grant the publisher has not made.
Record
| Original publisher | Mother Jones |
| Canonical URL | https://www.motherjones.com/criminal-justice/2026/05/supreme-court-intellectually-disabled-executions-hamm-smith/ |
| Publication time | Thu, 21 May 2026 15:48:56 +0000 |
| Retrieval time | 2026-05-21T15:51:30.965Z |
| Last seen | 2026-05-21T15:51:30.965Z |
| Headline source | Publisher (no WeSearch rewrite) |
| Excerpt source | publisher body |
| Excerpt method | First ~120 words (~800 chars) of extracted publisher body, fair-use limited. |
| Summary | WeSearch · cerebras-chat (WeSearch summarizer) |
| Summary source text | contentText |
| Citation coverage | Summary is a WeSearch-generated derivative; primary citation is the original publisher URL. |
| Cluster | J6c1ESh0syfM |
| Cluster logic | Grouped by semantic title/content similarity across sources within a rolling window. Same-publisher template collisions are excluded from coverage comparison. |
| Ranking reason | Story pages are not engagement-ranked. Hub feeds use recency, with optional source-diversified chronological ordering (cap consecutive stories per source). No personalized ranking. |
| Publisher visit | Yes — open original |
| Substitutes article? | No — link-out required for full text |
Rights status (four layers)
WeSearch handling by dimension
| Indexing | May the item be indexed (stored, ranked, made findable)? | Allowed |
| Snippet | May a short excerpt of the publisher's text be shown? | Allowed |
| AI summary | May WeSearch generate its own short summary of the article? | Limited |
| Retrieval / RAG | May the content be exposed for third-party retrieval-augmented generation? | Not asserted |
| Model training | May the content be used to train AI models? | Not asserted |
| Commercial reuse | May the content be reused commercially? | Not permitted |
Basis: Derived from the published RSS/Atom feed. Contact: [email protected]. Reviewed: 2026-07-24.
Opening excerpt (first ~120 words) tap to expand
freestar.config.enabled_slots.push({ placementName: "motherjones_right_rail_1", slotId: "ROS_ATF_300x600" }); The man at the center of this case, Joseph Clinton Smith, was found to have an intellectual disability while in school.Nevada Department of Corrections/AP Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily. On Thursday, the US Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to dismiss the Hamm v. Smith case, effectively upholding its rulings that people with intellectual disabilities should not be executed, and that IQ tests alone are not enough to determine whether someone has an intellectual disability.
…
Excerpt limited to ~120 words for fair-use compliance. The full article is at Mother Jones.
Discussion
0 commentsMore from Mother Jones
