Georgia bill lowering threshold for proving intellectual disability in death penalty cases heads to Gov. Kemp
The Georgia Senate passed a bill on Monday easing the state's strict burden of proof required for a death row inmate to be deemed intellectually disabled, which would make them ineligible for a death sentence.
The Peach State currently has the highest threshold in the nation for a person to prove they have an intellectual disability, allowing them to avoid the death penalty.
After a yearslong push to lessen requirements, the Senate approved H.B. 123 on Monday by a 53-1 vote. The measure now heads to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp's desk after it was unanimously approved by the House earlier this month.
Georgia became the first state to outlaw the death penalty for intellectually disabled people in 1988. The U.S. Supreme Court later followed suit and ruled in 2002 that executing intellectually disabled people violates constitutional protections against cruel and unusual punishment.
Georgia House Advances Bill To Ease Death Penalty Law For Intellectually Disabled People
The Supreme Court allowed states to determine the threshold for a person to be considered intellectually disabled. Georgia requires proof of intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt, making it the only state with such a high burden of proof.
Read On The Fox News App
H.B. 123 would lower the standard to a preponderance of evidence and amend trial procedures to ensure people facing a death sentence receive a fair chance at convincing judges and jurors of their disability.
The bill would allow defendants to present evidence of intellectual disability at a pretrial hearing that would be mandatory if prosecutors agree. There would also be a separate process before the same jury for determining whether someone is guilty and has an intellectual disability.
Defendants who are found to have an intellectual disability would be exempt from the death penalty and receive alternative sentences.
In multiple cases in Georgia, lawyers have unsuccessfully argued that their clients had intellectual disabilities. Judges in some of these cases said they might have succeeded if the state's rules were less strict.
Georgia Man Sentenced To Death Seeks Clemency On Grounds Of Intellectual Disability
When the Georgia Supreme Court in 2021 upheld the death penalty for Rodney Young in a 2008 killing, the justices found he had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was intellectually disabled, but then-Presiding Justice David Nahmias wrote that he would "embrace" legislative efforts to lower the threshold.
In another case, Warren Lee Hill was executed in Georgia in 2015 for killing a fellow detainee despite his lawyers arguing that he had an intellectual disability. In 2002, a judge said that if the state used a lower standard than reasonable doubt, Hill would likely have been found intellectually disabled.
Willie James Pye, whose IQ was allegedly low enough to show he was intellectually disabled, was executed in 2024 after his conviction in the 1993 rape and shooting death of his former girlfriend, Alicia Lynn Yarbrough. Pye's lawyers argued he was intellectually disabled and brain-damaged.
In the House, Democratic Rep. Esther Panitch argued that executing people with intellectual disabilities is a "moral failure."
"How we protect the most vulnerable and intellectually disabled individuals facing the death penalty is the ultimate test of our collective moral character, and I submit that we must choose compassion over retribution and understanding over punishment," Panitch said.
Lawyers For 'Morbidly Obese' Death Row Inmate Argue His Weight Could Cause Botched Lethal Injection
District attorneys who opposed the rule change in the past have said more recently that they are fine with changing the reasonable doubt standard, but some have taken issue with a couple of procedural changes in the bill, including one that adds a pretrial hearing to determine whether someone has an intellectual disability that would be mandatory if prosecutors agree and another that establishes a separate process in a trial for determining whether someone is guilty and has an intellectual disability.
Most states have these options, and lawyers say changing the reasonable doubt threshold will not stop intellectually disabled people from receiving the death penalty unless there are also procedural changes.
Separate processes would allow jurors to evaluate whether someone is intellectually disabled without being influenced by the evidence of the crime the person committed, the lawyers argue.
Some prosecutors allege that the bill would make it too difficult to pursue the death penalty and would prevent the practice from being carried out at all. They say that lawmakers should just ban the death penalty if that is their desire, but lawmakers have said that is not their intention.
People would also have the option to receive sentences of life without parole if they are exempt from the death penalty, instead of just a life sentence.
A Senate committee has also tweaked the bill so it would go into effect immediately and apply to all pending cases.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.Original article source: Georgia bill lowering threshold for proving intellectual disability in death penalty cases heads to Gov. Kemp

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans 'protect' kids by banning gender-affirming care. What about guns?
Editor's note: Letters to the editor reflect the views of individual readers. Scroll to see how you can add your voice, whether you agree or disagree, or click on this link to fill out the form. We welcome diverse viewpoints. There seems to be no limit to the growing Republican capacity for dishonesty and hypocrisy. They are all for "freedom" for almost any citizen to carry the AR-15 (which received glowing reviews in Vietnam for its lethality). Yet, if someone wants freedom Republicans interpret as "sexual," they're perceived as being "all in your face." Opinion: Tennesseans have different views on guns, but here's how we know solutions are possible Republicans claim they are "protecting" kids who are bullied and ostracized daily — by further ostracizing them. But protect them from a flood of firearms? Don't bother to General Skrmetti and Governor Bill Lee are slapping each other's backs because our Supreme "Free Vacations!" Court let them deny healthcare to trans kids. Yet the same kinds of healthcare are available to heterosexual kids if they "identify" as the right kind of person. The 'genital mutilation surgery' for minors was a scare tactic; it never happened. However, heterosexual girls can get breast surgeries with parental consent. You know, to help with their "identity." Any heterosexual kid can, for different conditions, get the same drugs that are part of gender-affirming care. This is a clear "equal protection" violation, proving the Supreme Court's right-wingers are actively biased. Republicans love to talk about "common sense," which is really just "things we've never questioned." Opinion: Tennessee Republicans can't run on their record. They're running against reality Biology shows that genetic and hormonal variations exist beyond the male/female division, despite "common sense." These variations expose the bigotry hidden behind the simplistic gender definitions that allow Skrmetti and Lee to comfortably deny the experts — and Carls, Nashville 37221 Agree or disagree? Or have a view on another topic entirely? Send a letter of 250 words or fewer to letters@ Include your full name, city/town, ZIP and contact information for verification. Thanks for adding to the public conversation. This article originally appeared on Nashville Tennessean: Protect kids by banning guns, not trans youth healthcare | Letters


New York Post
17 minutes ago
- New York Post
Cuomo puts the pedal to the metal in new sports car— and racks up multiple speeding tickets in school zones
Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo has been putting the pedal to the metal since moving back to the Big Apple to run for mayor. Cuomo's Dodge Charger muscle car was caught on camera speeding in school zones in Brooklyn on April 27 and May 2 — after being socked with two speeding tickets a mere minute apart March 28 while flying northbound on a seven-block stretch of the West Side Highway in Lower Manhattan, a Post analysis of city records shows. The ex-governor paid $365 in fines from March 6 through May 2, including the four speed-camera tickets, a ticket for parking in a bus lane and another for failing to feed a meter, according to the latest available data. Advertisement 4 Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo has been racking speeding tickets and breaking all sorts of other traffic laws park since moving back to the Big Apple to kick off in NYC mayoral campaign in March, records show. REUTERS And that's not counting the times Cuomo wasn't caught. The lead-foot ex-lawmaker was filmed May 28 apparently blowing a red light on Seventh Avenue in Midtown after speeding away from reporters trying to ask him questions following a news conference he hosted with labor leaders, according to video posted on social media. Advertisement On Monday, Cuomo's car was filmed blocking a left-turn lane on Eighth Avenue in Times Square while he attended a campaign event. 4 Cuomo's Dodge Charger muscle car was caught on camera speeding in school zones in Brooklyn on April 27 and May 2 — after being socked with two speeding tickets a mere minute apart March 28 on the West Side Highway in Manhattan. (Kevin C. Downs for The New York Post ) Cuomo's rogue riding is the latest example of his 'do as I say, not as I do'-style of governing, said Republican mayoral rival Curtis Sliwa, who added Cuomo is the one who signed a 2013 bill into law creating NYC speed-camera program. 'Andrew Cuomo racked up school zone and bus lane violations within weeks of moving to the city to run for mayor,' the Guardian Angels founder said. 'These are the very enforcement programs he helped create, and if he had actually lived here longer, there's no doubt the list would be a lot longer. Once again, it's rules for everyone else and a free pass for Andrew.' Advertisement Cuomo didn't have to worry about getting caught by speed and red-light cameras while serving his 10-year stint as governor, since he was chauffeured by state troopers in vehicles with license plates that can't be flagged by traffic cameras. 4 Cuomo paid $365 in traffic-violation fines from March 6 through May 2 after being slapped with four speed-camera tickets and two parking tickets. Michael Nagle The frontrunner heading into the Tuesday's Democratic mayoral primary won't have that luxury if elected to City Hall, because official city vehicles aren't shielded from speed cameras. Cuomo is 'committed to public safety' and wasn't driving 'reckless' when filmed running the red light, spokeswoman Esther Jensen insisted. Advertisement The governor was 'guided through a green light' and then 'paused mid-turn' to let a pedestrian cross safely before proceeding once the 'path was clear,' Jensen said. She added that NYPD cops were aware Cuomo parked in the left-turn lane to attend Monday's event, and a campaign staffer was available 'at all times' to move it, 'if asked.' The Dodge Charger is driven by multiple people, said Jensen, who would not clarify if the governor was behind the wheel when the car was fined. 4 Cuomo signed a 2013 bill into law creating NYC's speed-camera program. Christopher Sadowski Despite Cuomo's dismal driving record, he's got nothing on far-left mayoral candidate and Comptroller Brad Lander. The Democratic socialist racked up a jaw-dropping 136 traffic summonses since 2013 on his Totoya Prius, records show. Ten of the tickets were issued to lead-footed Lander for being caught on camera speeding in school zones, but a vast majority were for being a parking scofflaw. Lander has long pushed a green agenda aimed at getting New Yorkers to give up driving and take mass transit, but he's been chauffeured daily around the Big Apple by his NYPD security detail since 2022 when he was sworn in as comptroller.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Poll shows Trump's clash with courts puts Senate GOP on defense
New polling of likely voters in Senate battleground states has found President Trump's frequent clashes with federal courts are becoming a hot issue that could put Senate Republican candidates on the defensive in 2026. A poll of 1,000 likely voters in 2026 Senate battlegrounds, obtained exclusively by The Hill, found that 53 percent disapprove of Trump's handling of the courts, including 89 percent of Democrats, 55 percent of independents and 39 percent of self-identified non-MAGA Republicans. The poll was conducted by Global Strategy Group, a Democratic-aligned polling firm, on behalf of Demand Justice, a Democratic-aligned judicial advocacy group. The survey found that more than two-thirds of voters, 72 percent, said they are concerned about Trump's response to court orders and 48 percent said they were extremely concerned by what they saw as the president's refusal to obey court orders. The poll found that 68 percent of voters surveyed said they viewed congressional Republicans as helping Trump evade legal norms, and 44 percent said they viewed that dynamic as extremely concerning. It surveyed voters in Colorado, Georgia, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio and Texas. The Senate's two most vulnerable Republican incumbents are Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) is the chamber's most vulnerable Democrat. 'The data is clear: Americans increasingly reject Donald Trump's attacks on the rule of law and the courts. Over two-thirds are concerned about this blatant disregard for court orders and the threat that it poses to the rights of every person in this country,' said Maggie Jo Buchanan, the interim executive director of Demand Justice. 'When Trump treats judicial rulings as mere suggestions instead of legally binding obligations, it sends a chilling message that our legal protections are meaningless,' Buchanan added. 'An overwhelming majority of Americans across the political spectrum are concerned that this calculated defiance sets a precedent where individuals may face unfair trials, see their rights disregarded without consequence, and find themselves powerless to seek justice,' she added. U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia James Boasberg criticized the Trump administration earlier this year for disregarding his order to stop the deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members to El Salvador. The administration argued the deportation flights had already departed the United States at the time Boasberg issued his order and asserted they later complied with a written order. The Trump White House has also come under criticism for barring a reporter and photographer from The Associated Press from the Oval Office in April despite a court order from U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia Trevor McFadden ruling the government could not retaliate against the news agency for refusing to follow Trump's order renaming the Gulf of Mexico the Gulf of America. The poll also found 70 percent of voters that Trump's allies in Congress will help him pick judges who will do what he wants instead of acting independently, with 43 percent of respondents saying they're 'extremely' concerned. The poll's sample included 44 percent of self-identified Democrats, 44 percent of self-identified Republicans and 12 percent of self-identified independents. It was conducted between May 28 and June 1 and had a margin of error of 3.1 percent. Updated at 8:43 a.m. EDT Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.