No. 20-6500
Alfred Bourgeois v. T. J. Watson, Warden, et al.
Amici (1)IFP
Tags: death-penalty diagnostic-standards due-process federal-death-penalty-act federal-statute habeas-corpus intellectual-disability judicial-review
Key Terms:
AdministrativeLaw HabeasCorpus Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
AdministrativeLaw HabeasCorpus Punishment JusticiabilityDoctri
Latest Conference:
N/A
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Does the Federal Death Penalty Act prohibit the execution of a federal prisoner who is intellectually disabled?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED Does the Federal Death Penalty Act, which provides that a “sentence of death shall not be carried out upon a person who is mentally retarded,” prohibit the government from executing a federal prisoner who is intellectually disabled under current legal and diagnostic standards? If so, does 28 U.S.C. § 2241 provide a remedy for such a prisoner when a court had previously denied his claim using now-rejected judge-made criteria instead of clinically accepted diagnostic standards? i
Docket Entries
2020-12-11
Application (20A104) referred to the Court.
2020-12-11
Petition DENIED.
2020-12-11
Application (20A104) denied by the Court. JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR, with whom JUSTICE KAGAN joins, dissenting from the denial of certiorari and application for stay. (Detached <a href = 'https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/20a104_l537.pdf'>opinion</a>)
2020-12-07
Reply of petitioner Alfred Bourgeois filed.
2020-12-04
Brief of respondents T. J. Watson, Warden, et al. in opposition filed.
2020-12-03
Brief amicus curiae of The Constitution Project filed.
2020-12-03
Application (20A104) for a stay of execution of sentence of death, submitted to Justice Barrett.
2020-12-02
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due January 4, 2021)
Attorneys
Alfred Bourgeois
T. J. Watson, Warden, et al.
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent