The re-assessment of Atkins v. Virginia presents an opportunity to revisit a landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that reshaped the legal landscape surrounding capital punishment and intellectual disability. In its 2002 ruling, the Court held that executing individuals with intellectual disabilities violated the Eighth Amendment’s prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment. This decision set a precedent for protecting individuals with such disabilities from the death penalty, while leaving to the states the responsibility of defining intellectual disability and implementing the ruling. Over the years, however, controversies have emerged regarding inconsistent standards across states, the definition and assessment of intellectual disability, and whether advancements in medical and psychological understanding should further influence this legal framework.

​

This topic invites delegates to critically examine Atkins v. Virginia in light of contemporary legal, medical, and ethical considerations. Delegates will explore whether the criteria for determining intellectual disability should be redefined and how to ensure consistent application across different states to prevent arbitrary or unjust sentencing. They will also evaluate how evolving understandings of intellectual disability, advances in neuroscience, and the role of expert testimony in court should impact future rulings. In doing so, delegates must balance the interests of justice and individual rights with broader societal concerns about the application of the death penalty. Ultimately, the re-assessment of Atkins v. Virginia offers an opportunity to refine legal protections for vulnerable individuals while addressing broader questions about the constitutionality of capital punishment in the modern era.

​

​