Whether a state may thwart the constitutional prohibition against execution of the intellectually disabled by failing to provide a procedural vehicle for the adjudication of an Atkins-exemption claim

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Where a petitioner establishes uncontested proof that despite effort he never progressed beyond the first grade level and dropped out of third grade at age fourteen after social promotion; that he never could understand value of denominations of currency or coins and could only make a purchase by holding out his hand with money in it letting the seller take out the amount due; that he did not understand the notion of prices, that is, that two toothbrushes or two loaves of bread or two pencils could cost different amounts; that he could not read a calendar and could not keep up with dates, even his own birthday; that he could not find his way to a new location even in the area where he lived with verbal directions — yet he also could not read written instructions; that he would often enter the wrong bathroom, because he was unable to read the signage or to remember the pictorial symbols for male and female; that to call a friend, he had to use a list which had only phone numbers, not names, and dialed each number in his list one by one until he reached the right person — though often he forgot who he intended to call before he got to that number; that though he held various low-skill jobs, his co-workers had to repeatedly instruct and monitor him, even with respect to simple tasks and he lost jobs due to inability to keep himself safe on the worksite; that his reported, unadjusted IQ score is between 69 and 72, that his disabilities existed prior to his eighteenth birthday, and where this Court declared in Moore v. Texas, “States may not execute anyone in ‘the entire category of [intellectually disabled] offenders” may i a state thwart the Constitutional prohibition against execution of the intellectually disabled by failing to provide a procedural vehicle for the adjudication of an Atkinsexemption claim? Moore v. Texas, 137 S.Ct. 1039, 1051 (2017) (emphasis in original) (quoting Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 563-63 (2005)). ii