Final answer:
The Supreme Court decision in Atkins v. Virginia ruled that executing individuals with intellectual disabilities violates the Eighth Amendment's prohibition on cruel and unusual punishment, requiring prisons to provide appropriate treatment to developmentally challenged inmates. Atkins had a significantly lowered IQ, which affected the nature of his punishment, changing it from death to life imprisonment. This case set a precedent and triggered discussions on intellectual disability definitions and their impact on legal proceedings.
Step-by-step explanation:
In the case of Atkins v. Virginia, the Supreme Court held that prisons are required to provide treatment to developmentally challenged inmates. This landmark decision was made on June 20, 2002, where the Court ruled that executions of people with intellectual disabilities are 'cruel and unusual punishments' prohibited by the Eighth Amendment. Atkins was initially sentenced to death, but after it was revealed that his intellectual capacity was significantly below average with an IQ of 59, the Supreme Court reversed its prior ruling. Further examinations into his mental state revealed that his death penalty sentence was not appropriate, which ultimately led to his re-sentencing to life imprisonment.
The Atkins v. Virginia decision highlighted the issues regarding the treatment of individuals with intellectual disabilities within the criminal justice system. It set the precedent that intellectual disability impacts decision-making capabilities, and such factors should influence the severity of legal punishment. This case also led to a broader discourse on what constitutes intellectual disability and gave states the authority to define the term for themselves.
The Atkins decision was a critical step in the United States' evolving standards of decency in the context of capital punishment. It built upon previous decisions like Furman v. Georgia that addressed the inconsistent application of the death penalty, and continued with later rulings including Hall v. Florida, which clarified that IQ scores alone cannot determine eligibility for the death penalty. The ruling is a reflection of societal beliefs about intelligence, legal culpability, and the appropriate application of the death penalty.