Final answer:
A death penalty litigant can be barred from filing a writ of habeas corpus due to various rulings that have placed limits on the death penalty, such as protecting certain classes of individuals and upholding constitutional rights, as well as judicial interpretations related to cruel and unusual punishment.
Step-by-step explanation:
A death penalty litigant may be barred from filing a writ of habeas corpus in federal court if certain legal principles and precedents are at play. Typically, the Constitution guarantees the right to file a writ of habeas corpus, which cannot be suspended except in cases of rebellion or public danger. However, within the death penalty context, certain limitations can arise from Supreme Court rulings. For instance, Enmund v. Florida precludes death penalties for those not directly involved in a killing during a felony. Additionally, Ford v. Wainwright prohibits the execution of the insane. The Supreme Court has consistently put constraints on the death penalty, protecting classes of individuals such as those with cognitive disabilities, juveniles, or defendants in nonhomicidal crimes.
The judicial decisions in Breard v. Greene and cases like Roper v. Simmons and Atkins v. Virginia also underscore the inherently dynamic nature of constitutional interpretation with respect to the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. Challenges such as ineffective assistance of counsel, as illustrated by Gideon v. Wainwright, also affect a litigant's access to federal habeas corpus proceedings.