Supreme Court halts execution of murderer with dementia because he cannot remember crime

Justice Brett Kavanaugh did not rule in this case

The US Supreme Court in Washington, DC. (AFP/Getty Images)

An Alabama man was set to be executed this year - despite suffering from dementia and claiming he no longer remember the crimes he committed. But, on Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that the state of Alabama cannot execute Vernon Madison if his dementia prevents him from rationally understanding why he is being put to death.

Madison, who has been on death row for killing a police officer in 1985, and his attorneys argued that his death sentence is in violation of the Eighth amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment since he has vascular dementia and no longer remembers committing the murder he was convicted guilty for decades ago.

Chief Justice John Roberts sided with liberal justices in a 5-3 decision ruling in favour of Madison, citing the US Constitution limits the execution of people with mental illnesses.

Adding that the Eighth Amendment bans executing any mentally ill person unable to “understand the societal judgment underlying his sentence,” regardless of the cause or mental disorder.

In court, Madison’s attorney argued that the Alabama court only considered whether their client’s delusion—and not their dementia condition–warranted a halt on his execution.

Justice Elena Kagan, who announced the court’s ruling from her bench, said the Eighth Amendment does not care for the specifics or diagnosis of the mentally ill inmate when halting their execution.

“The Eighth Amendment doesn’t care about the particular diagnosis — schizophrenia, dementia, or something else entirely,” Ms Kagan said. “If a person suffering from any mental disorder — dementia included — is unable to rationally understand why the state wants to execute him, then the Eighth Amendment doesn’t allow the execution.”

The high court also ordered the Alabama court to reconsider Madison’s case, citing that it is uncertain if the state court recognised his dementia renders him unable to rationally understand the reasoning for his punishment.

“The state court, we have little doubt, can evaluate such matters better than we,” Ms Kagan wrote in the majority opinion. “It must do so as the first step in assessing Madison’s competency—and ensuring that if he is to be executed, he understands why.”

Those opposed are Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas and Neil Gorsuch.

In a vitriolic dissent, Mr Alito said the court the Supreme Court took on the case to determine the specific question of whether the Eighth Amendment prevents the execution of an a murder who can no longer remember the murder he committed. He also said Madison’s attorneys deceived the court by shifting their argument that the state court rejected their claim that their client’s dementia made his execution unconstitutional.

“Counsel’s tactics flagrantly flouted our rules,” Alito said.

Fixated on the protocols and procedures of the court’s system of review, Mr Alito said the Supreme Court would become chaotic if the justices allowed attorneys to switch the question of their review to an entirely different one after it agreed to take their case.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh did not have a hand in the ruling since the case was heard before his confirmation to the court.