Does requiring a capital defendant to prove his intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt violate the Due Process Clause and the Eighth Amendment?

QUESTIONS PRESENTED Georgia requires persons with intellectual disability to prove their disability ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ in order to vindicate their Eighth Amendment right to be free from execution. It is the only state to do so. Georgia’s onerous burden is an extreme outlier not merely on the issue of intellectual disability; to petitioner’s knowledge, no other state, in any other context, requires an individual to prove the factual predicate for any constitutional right beyond a reasonable doubt. Under this standard, Georgia will execute capital defendants who are more likely than not intellectually disabled. Indeed, it will even execute those who establish by clear and convincing evidence that they are intellectually disabled. The questions presented are: (1) Does requiring a capital defendant to prove his intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt violate the Due Process Clause by creating an unacceptable risk that a constitutional right will go unenforced? (2) Does requiring a capital defendant to prove his intellectual disability beyond a reasonable doubt violate the Eighth Amendment by creating an unacceptable risk that an intellectually disabled person will be executed? i