Court bars executing retarded

In a day of major rulings, the justices reversed direction on the death penalty, citing national and world opinion. 

 The United States has reached a collective moral judgment that mentally retarded individuals should not face the death penalty.

 In a landmark 6-to-3 decision, the US Supreme Court Thursday declared a constitutional prohibition on imposing capital punishment on convicted murderers and other capital defendants who are deemed to be mentally retarded. The court ruled that such death sentences amounted to a form of cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.

 It marks the first time since 1988 that the court has expanded the Eighth Amendment's categorical ban on an aspect of the death penalty. The immediate impact of the ruling will be to create new grounds for appeal for death-row inmates, legal analysts say, but the actual number of prisoners who may have their sentences changed from death to life in prison is likely to be small.

 On a broader level, the decision adds momentum to efforts in the US to abolish the death penalty altogether an effort that has accelerated following the use of DNA evidence to uncover innocent convicts on death row. In addition, the decision opens the door to future cases examining the constitutionality of executing 16- and 17-year-olds, because similar constitutional reasoning may apply in such cases.

 In his majority opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens writes, "We are not persuaded that the execution of mentally retarded criminals will measurably advance the deterrent or the retributive purpose of the death penalty." He adds, "Construing and applying the Eighth Amendment in the light of our 'evolving standards of decency,' we therefore conclude that such punishment is excessive."

 Signing on to his majority opinion were Justices Sandra Day O'Connor, Anthony Kennedy, David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer.

 In a blistering dissent, Justice Antonin Scalia denounced the majority's decision as "the pinnacle of our Eighth Amendment death-is-different jurisprudence."

 "Seldom has an opinion of this court rested so obviously upon nothing but the personal views of its members," Justice Scalia writes. He predicted a flood of appeals from death-row inmates falsely claiming to be mentally retarded.

 Death-penalty opponents hailed the decision in Atkins v. Virginia as a major step forward for the nation.

 "It makes the statement that this country is not going to execute people who have the mind of a child - we finally have now joined the rest of the world in that," says Jonathan Broun of the Center for Death Penalty Litigation in Durham, N.C.

 A majority of justices found that an evolving standard of decency related to the imposition of the death penalty had resulted in the emergence of a national consensus opposed to subjecting mentally retarded individuals to capital punishment.

 Eighteen states have passed laws banning execution of the mentally retarded in certain circumstances. That total is up from two states that banned the practice the last time the high court considered a similar case in 1989. In addition, 12 states ban capital punishment altogether.

 Citing this growing level of state legislative opposition, the justices said the nation has now reached enough agreement to justify the establishment of a constitutional rule to protect a special class of individuals from capital punishment.

 Those with an IQ of 70 and below and who over an extended period have manifested some difficulty in day-to-day functioning are considered mentally retarded. Roughly 1 to 3 % of the US population fall into this category, experts say.

 The decision comes in the case of Daryl Renard Atkins who was convicted and sentenced to die as a result of the August 1996 shooting death in Yorktown, Va., of a US Air Force airman.

 Mr. Atkins and another man, William Jones, abducted the airman at gunpoint outside a convenience store. They drove him in his own truck to a bank ATM machine and forced him to withdraw $200. Then they drove him to a remote location where the young serviceman was repeatedly shot. Atkins and Mr. Jones were arrested after police viewed the surveillance camera at the ATM machine.

 Atkins was identified by a court-appointed psychologist as being mildly mentally retarded with an IQ of 59. Virginia officials dispute that Atkins is mentally retarded. The court's decision may necessitate further litigation in the Atkins case over whether he falls within the legal definition of retarded. If not, he could still be put to death as a result of his conviction.

 Fourteen years ago, the high court ruled that a national consensus existed against executing anyone younger than 16. And in 1977, the court ruled that executing convicted rapists violated the Eighth Amendment's prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

 In the context of mental retardation, the court found that even though mentally retarded individuals may know the difference between right and wrong (the key issue in an insanity defense), they nonetheless lack the same level of blameworthiness or culpability as those without a mental disability. In effect, they lack the ability to fully understand how wrong their actions were.

 "Their deficiencies do not warrant an exemption from criminal sanctions, but they do diminish their personal culpability," writes Justice Stevens.

 Stevens says in effect that since death is society's ultimate penalty it should be reserved only for the most blameworthy criminals. The court also says it is easier for police and prosecutors to maneuver mentally retarded suspects into death penalty cases. Thus, the opinion says, there is a higher chance of a wrongful conviction and a wrongful execution. 

  US Newswire

AAMR Applauds U.S. Supreme Court Decision to Ban Execution of Persons with Mental Retardation

 In a 6-3 vote today, the U.S. Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional and cruel to execute persons with mental retardation. The American Association on Mental Retardation (AAMR) fully supports this decision. AAMR has tirelessly advocated against executing people with mental retardation on the grounds that it is morally and ethically wrong, and that it is "cruel and unusual punishment" under the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

 The Supreme Court decision comes in the wake of the Daryl Renard Atkins case, an individual who has an IQ of 59 and has never lived on his own or held a job.

 James W. Ellis, attorney for Atkins and past president of AAMR says, "The Court has recognized the consensus among the American people, even those who support the death penalty. They are deeply disturbed by the prospect that people with mental retardation could face execution." Ellis has led the association's efforts in advocating for full protections and rights of persons with mental retardation facing the death penalty.

 AAMR has long served as amicus curiae in Supreme Court cases and has published a position paper on mental retardation and the death penalty. See: http://www.aamr.org/Policies/position_statements.shtml.

 In 2001, AAMR and 8 other disability organizations presented an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court advocating against the death penalty in the Atkins case.

 "I am deeply grateful that the Supreme Court Justices have put an end to this barbaric practice of killing persons who do not have the full intellectual capacity to understand the crime they committed," says Doreen Croser, executive director of AAMR. "This is an important day for disability advocates and for our country."

 Headquartered in Washington, D.C., AAMR is a 126-year old professional organization that promotes progressive policies, sound research, effective practices, and universal rights for people with intellectual disabilities.

La peine de mort supprim�e pour les handicap�s mentaux

La Cour supr�me des Etats-Unis a interdit, jeudi 20 juin, l'ex�cution des handicap�s mentaux en la qualifiant de pratique cruelle et contraire � la Constitution am�ricaine. Cette d�cision a �t� per�ue par les abolitionnistes comme le reflet de l'�volution des mentalit�s aux Etats-Unis contre l'imposition de la peine capitale.

 La Cour supr�me, qui a pris sa d�cision � une majorit� de six contre trois juges, a ainsi invoqu� le 8e amendement de la Constitution qui interdit "les ch�timents cruels et inhabituels".     

 Comme l'explique Barry Weinstein, avocat et sp�cialiste de la peine de mort, "d�sormais, aucun handicap� mental dans le couloir de la mort ne pourra �tre ex�cut�". Selon lui, ces condamn�s devraient pouvoir obtenir de voir leur sentence de mort commu�e en peine de prison � vie.

 Faute de chiffres pr�cis, il est difficile de savoir combien de condamn�s � mort seront concern�s par cette mesure. Le juge John Paul Stevens, qui a r�dig� la d�cision au nom de la majorit� des neuf juges de la Cour, a fait valoir qu'elle avait �t� prise "� la lumi�re du changement dramatique intervenu ces 13 derni�res ann�es dans le paysage l�gislatif" am�ricain. En 1989, seuls deux Etats avaient interdit l'ex�cution des handicap�s mentaux, contre 18 aujourd'hui, sur les 38 Etats am�ricains o� existe la peine de mort. A cette date, la Cour supr�me avait estim� que l'ex�cution de handicap�s mentaux, dont le QI est inf�rieur � 85 sur 150 selon l'�chelle de Wechsler, ne constituait pas une violation de la Constitution am�ricaine.

 "La capacit� limit�e des d�linquants handicap�s mentaux requiert une reconsid�ration de la loi pour les pr�server d'une �ventuelle condamnation � mort", a �crit jeudi le juge Stevens. Selon lui, cette cat�gorie de criminels est moins en mesure de s'expliquer devant un juge ou d'aider ses avocats afin de b�n�ficier de la meilleure d�fense possible. "Leur comportement peut cr�er l'impression qu'ils sont d�nu�s de remords � l'�gard de leur crime", a-t-il poursuivi.

 La Cour supr�me avait d�cid� de se pencher sur la constitutionalit� de l'application de la peine de mort aux handicap�s mentaux le 20 f�vrier dernier, en examinant le cas de Daryl Renard Atkins, 24 ans. Ce pr�venu a �t� condamn� � la peine capitale en Virginie, Etat du sud-est, pour avoir enlev� et tu� de huit balles un militaire am�ricain, Eric Nesbit, en 1996, alors qu'il retirait de l'argent � un distributeur. Un m�decin psychiatre, le docteur Evan Nelson, avait examin� M. Atkins avant de conclure qu'il �tait "moyennement handicap�" et avait fix� son quotient intellectuel � 59.

 Le juge Antonin Scalia, au nombre des trois qui se sont oppos�s � la d�cision de la Cour supr�me, a �t� particuli�rement virulent. Il est ais� de "feindre" les sympt�mes d'une maladie mentale. "Un accus� risquant la peine de mort qui feindra le retard mental ne risquera plus rien du tout", s'est-il indign�.

 Pour Wayne Smith, directeur du Justice Project qui milite aupr�s du Congr�s pour l'abolition de la peine de mort, la d�cision est importante mais insuffisante. L'association du Barrau am�ricain s'est lui aussi f�licit� de cette d�cision de la Cour supr�me, affirmant qu'il fallait � pr�sent "trouver de meilleurs moyens d'identifier des handicap�s mentaux condamn�s � mort qui n'ont pas �t� diagnostiqu�s comme tels".

Les handicap�s mentaux am�ricains �pargn�s

La Cour supr�me interdit leur condamnation � mort.

   Par Fabrice ROUSSELOT

21 juin 2002

�C'est la d�cision la plus importante sur la peine de mort dans ce pays depuis un quart de si�cle.� Stephen Hawkins, abolitionniste    New York de notre correspondant

  n f�vrier dernier, la Cour supr�me avait d�cid� de se pencher sur le cas de Daryl Atkins, un jeune Noir de Virginie ayant le quotient intellectuel d'un enfant de 8 ans, condamn� � mort en 1996 pour avoir tu� un militaire. Moins de six mois plus tard, la plus haute juridiction du pays a annonc� hier qu'elle interdisait d�sormais l'ex�cution des handicap�s mentaux, la d�clarant �anticonstitutionnelle�.

 L'opinion favorable. Une d�cision inattendue pour certains, alors que cette m�me Cour supr�me avait pris une position contraire en 1989. Cette fois, pourtant, � six voix contre trois, les juges ont estim� que l'ex�cution des handicap�s mentaux �tait une violation directe de l'article 8 de la Constitution am�ricaine, qui s'�l�ve contre �les ch�timents cruels et inhabituels�. Pour justifier son arr�t, la cour a �voqu� un �changement� de l'opinion, expliquant qu'il existait d�sormais �un consensus national contre l'ex�cution des handicap�s�.

 M�me Bush. Si seuls deux Etats interdisaient la peine de mort pour les attard�s il y a une dizaine d'ann�es, ils sont d�sormais dix-huit � la bannir. M�me le pr�sident George W. Bush s'�tait prononc� contre la peine capitale �pour ceux qui ne savent pas faire la diff�rence entre le bien et le mal�, alors qu'en tant que gouverneur du Texas, il avait autoris� l'ex�cution de pr�s de 150 personnes.

 L'arr�t de la Cour supr�me a �t� salu� comme une �victoire d�cisive� par les opposants � la peine capitale aux Etats-Unis. �C'est la d�cision la plus importante sur la peine de mort dans ce pays depuis un quart de si�cle, assure Stephen Hawkins, le directeur de la National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty. Cela montre que l'Am�rique �volue peu � peu vers une soci�t� plus mature. L'�tape suivante pour la Cour supr�me serait de consid�rer le probl�me de l'ex�cution des mineurs.� Selon Jim Coleman, professeur de droit � Duke University, �c'est aussi l'occasion de faire rebondir le d�bat sur la peine de mort et sur les imperfections du syst�me judiciaire�. Depuis deux ans en outre, plusieurs �tudes ont d�nonc� le nombre �lev� d'erreurs judiciaires dans des cas d'ex�cution. Sur les 38 Etats qui soutiennent toujours la peine de mort, deux ont d�cid� d'imposer des moratoires et une dizaine d'autres doivent en d�battre dans la l�gislature, apr�s que plusieurs condamn�s � mort eurent �t� innocent�s au dernier moment.

 Crainte. La majorit� des commentateurs soulignaient hier que le jugement de la cour visait �uniquement les handicap�s mentaux avec un quotient intellectuel inf�rieur � 70�. Interrog�s sur les t�l�s, des procureurs ont exprim� la crainte que de nombreux d�tenus, dans les couloirs de la mort, essaient d�sormais �de jouer sur leurs capacit�s intellectuelles� pour faire commuer leur peine en prison � vie .

20.06/02

Il maggiore organo giudiziario americano ha giudicato

incostituzionale infliggere loro la pena capitale

La Corte Suprema Usa

"No a esecuzione ritardati"

Decisione storica che ribalta una pronuncia di 13 anni fa

NEW YORK - I ritardati mentali condannati per omicidio non potranno essere puniti con la pena capitale: con una sentenza storica, che capovolge la precedente giurisprudenza, la Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti ha giudicato incostituzionale infliggere la morte a coloro che hanno problemi di ritardi mentali poich� la costituzione americana vieta di infliggere pene crudeli o inusitate. Con questa pronuncia, che ha spaccato profondamente il massimo organo giudiziario americano (formato da nove giudici supremi, sei dei quali oggi si sono pronunciati a favore, tre contro), i ritardati che si macchiano di reati cos� gravi come l'omicido saranno s� processati, ma non andranno incontro a una pena che nei loro confronti risulta essere "crudele" e "inusitata".

Il tema della pena di morte � scottante negli Stati Uniti ed � stato al centro per mesi di un infuocatissimo dibattito. La sentenza di oggi � una delle pi� "forti" pronunciate da parecchi anni a questa parte sulla pena di morte: era il 1989 quando la Corte Suprema degli Stati Uniti dichiar� costituzionali le esecuzioni di ritardati mentali. Da allora l'atteggiamento e la mentalit� dell'America nei confronti della pena di morte � cambiato. E' quanto hanno sottolineato, nel motivare la loro decisione, i sei giudici della Corte che hanno deciso oggi di capovolgere la sentenza di 13 anni fa.

Mancano dati numerici attendibili sulla percentuale di ritardati mentali fra gli oltre 3.700 detenuti nel "braccio della morte" delle carceri statunitensi. "Non siamo persuasi - si legge nella pronuncia della Corte Suprema, redatta dal giudice John Paul Stevens in 17 pagine - che l'esecuzione capitale di criminali mentalmente ritardati contribuisca in misura avvertibile al deterrente o allo scopo punitivo attribuito alla pena di morte".

 Da quando la Corte Suprema ripristin� la pena di morte (era il 1976), sono risultati mentalmente ritardati 35 degli oltre 775 giustiziati negli Stati Uniti per una condanna per omicidio: cos� affermano le organizzazioni che si battono per l'abolizione della pena di morte, secondo le quali quei 35 giustiziati avevano evidenziato quozienti di intelligenza non superiore ai 70 punti (la media nazionale statunitense � di cento punti).

La Corte si � pronunciata sul caso di un detenuto della Virginia, Daryl Renard Atkins, condannato a morte nonostante abbia un quoziente d'intelligenza di 59 (quindi ben al di sotto del minimo di 70 che per la legge americana fissa il limite di una piena capacit� mentale).

L'effetto immediato della sentenza si rifletter� nei 20 stati degli Usa che ancora consideravano legittima l'esecuzione di ritardati. Non ci sono cifre disponibili su quante condanne potrebbero essere mutate immediatamente in ergastoli, ma secondo fonti legali sarebbero decine.

Nel 1989 erano solo due gli stati che si opponevano alla condanna di ritardati, adesso sono 18. "Non � tanto il numero degli stati a essere significativo - ha scritto il giudice John Paul Stevens nella relazione di maggioranza - quanto la consistenza della direzione del cambiamento. Questa pratica � diventata inusuale ed � corretto dire che contro di essa si � sviluppato un consenso nazionale".

I tre giudici pi� conservatori della Corte, William Rehnquist, Antonin Scalia e Clarence Thomas, si sono duramente pronunciati contro la decisione degli altri sei giudici, definendola "un grave errore".

SUPREME COURT DECLARES EXECUTION OF PERSONS WITH MENTAL RETARDATION UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Ruling Reflects Growing National Consensus on Issue

                WASHINGTON, DC - The Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling today ending the execution of those with mental retardation. In Atkins v. Virginia, the Court held that it is a violation of the ban on cruel unusual punishment to execute death row inmates who have mental retardation. The decision reflects the national consensus which has formed on this issue.

   "Thirty states have either banned the death penalty altogether or stopped the execution of those with mental retardation," said Richard C. Dieter, Executive Director of the Death Penalty Information Center. "There is no doubt that there is now a national consensus on this issue. Concerns remain about many other aspects of the death penalty, but at least today we have stopped a practice that most Americans and the rest of world finds abhorrent."

   In 1989, when the U.S. Supreme Court decided Penry v. Lynaugh,  only two states - Maryland and Georgia - prohibited execution of the mentally retarded.  At that time, the Supreme Court held that executing persons with mental retardation was not a violation of the Eighth Amendment because a "national consensus" had not developed against this practice. Since then, 16 more states and the federal government have enacted laws prohibiting the execution of those with mental retardation.

  In addition to the increasing number of states banning the execution of those with mental retardation, a number of prominent national organizations have urged similar action. In 1989, the American Bar Association established a policy opposing the execution of those with mental retardation.  The ABA held that execution of such individuals is unacceptable in a civilized society, irrespective of their guilt or innocence. The ABA joined a number of other national organizations - including veteran diplomats of the American Foreign Service, the United States Catholic Conference, the American Association on Mental Retardation, the American Psychological Association, and the American Civil Liberties Union - in filing amicus briefs with the Supreme Court on behalf of Daryl Atkins, a Virginia death row inmate with an IQ of 59.

  While the exact number of inmates affected by today's ruling is not certain, the decision will require changes in the 20 states that have not yet banned the execution of those with mental retardation. In the past, some inmates with mental retardation, like Earl Washington of Virginia, even confessed to crimes they did not commit. Washington was sentenced to death and later given an absolute pardon when DNA testing revealed his innocence. Currently, there are more than 3,700 inmates on death row in the United States.

 Professor James Ellis, a national expert on mental retardation and the death penalty, can be reached at (505) 277-4830. Gerald Zerkin, who represented Earl Washington on appeal, can be reached at (804) 565-0880.

EL PAIS   

El Supremo de EE UU prohibe la ejecuci�n de discapacitados mentales por inconstitucional

 M�s de 200 est�n en el 'corredor de la muerte', seg�n grupos de derechos humanos

 ROSA TOWSEND | Miami

El Tribunal Supremo de Estados Unidos declar� ayer inconstitucional la aplicaci�n de la pena de muerte a los discapacitados mentales, reconociendo en su fallo que los tiempos han cambiado y la sociedad estadounidense est� mayoritariamente en contra. Fue un voto hist�rico pero no un�nime. Los tres miembros m�s conservadores de los nueve magistrados de la m�xima corte del pa�s expresaron su desacuerdo con este fallo en t�rminos poco usuales, criticando a sus colegas por haberse dejado influir 'por la opini�n p�blica y la comunidad internacional'.

 El presidente del Supremo, William Rehnquist, incluso se neg� a utilizar el formulismo habitual en los fallos judiciales, que acaban con un 'respetuosamente', y concluy� su disensi�n diciendo: 'Con el convencimiento de que esta es una decisi�n seriamente equivocada, disiento'. Los otros dos magistrados que se opusieron fueron Antonin Scalia y Clarence Thomas, que habitualmente forman el n�cleo ultraconservador del alto tribunal de Estados Unidos.

 En nombre de la mayor�a, el magistrado Paul Stevens sostuvo que 'es justo decir que se ha desarrollado un consenso nacional en contra, que refleja incuestionablemene la opini�n de la mayor�a sobre la relativa culpabilidad de los delincuentes discapacitados mentales'. En otro p�rrafo del dictamen escrib�a: 'Muchos condenados discapacitados distinguen entre obrar bien y mal, pero son m�s proclives a actuar por impulsos o ser convencidos por otros. Sus deficiencias no merecen una exenci�n de castigo, pero disminuyen su culpabilidad'.

 El fallo de ayer anul� otro del propio Tribunal Supremo de 1989, que consideraba que la pena capital no era un castigo 'cruel e inusual' para los discapacitados mentales, y que ha estado vigente hasta ahora en los 38 estados en los que la pena de muerte es legal. En 1989, s�lo el Gobierno federal y dos de los 50 estados prohibieron las ejecuciones de discapacitados mentales, mientras que en la actualidad son 20. De los 38 estados con pena capital, 18 la permit�an hasta ayer.

 Desde que la pena de muerte se restableci� en Estados Unidos en 1976 al menos 35 personas con distintos grados de discapacidad mental han sido ejecutadas. Se desconoce el n�mero exacto de los discapacitados que est�n actualmente condenados, pero las organizaciones de derechos civiles sit�an la cifra entre 200 y 300, entre el total de 3.700 reos que aguardan en el corredor de la muerte en todo el pa�s. El fallo no liberar� a los convictos de cumplir cadena perpetua, pero previsiblemente facilitar� el que muchos condenados a muerte apelen sus casos aduciendo retraso mental.

 Legalmente, en Estados Unidos se considera discapacitado a quien tiene un coeficiente mental inferior a 70 (el promedio normal es de 100). Daryl Renard Atkins, el condenado cuyo caso propici� el dictamen de ayer, tiene un coeficiente de 59.

 Atkins fue condenado por la muerte de un oficial de aviaci�n al que secuestr� con la ayuda de un c�mplice para robarle en 1996. Despu�s relat� a la polic�a c�mo le usurparon el dinero, le dispararon ocho veces y tiraron su cuerpo en un bosque, demostrando con ello, seg�n la organizaci�n de derechos humanos Human Righs Watch, su incapacidad para entender la seriedad de los hechos y sopesar las ramificaciones de su confesi�n.

 Celebraci�n del fallo

 Distintos sectores de la sociedad estadounidense celebraron ayer el fallo. Richard Dieter, director del Centro de Informaci�n sobre la Pena de Muerte, dijo que 'al menos hemos detenido una pr�ctica que el resto del mundo considera abominable'. Y el congresista dem�crata Russ Feingold la calific� como 'un giro extraordinario en el curso de la historia de nuestra naci�n'.

 El fallo del Tribunal Supremo se produce en momentos en que el Congreso estadounidense estudia una reforma de la ley para impedir que se ejecute a personas cuya inocencia fue revelada cuando ya era demasiado tarde, como ha ocurrido en varias ocasiones. La propuesta asegura que los acusados tienen derecho a pedir pruebas de ADN y a una defensa legal apropiada para evitar atrocidades como la del abogado que se durmi� durante un juicio en Tejas, en el que condenaron a muerte a su cliente. 

EL MUNDO  

El Supremo de EEUU proh�be la ejecuci�n de enfermos mentales

 El fallo afecta a los 20 estados en los que a�n estaban permitidas estas sentencias

 JULIO A. PARRADO. Corresponsal

 NUEVA YORK. Uno de los aspectos m�s crueles de la pena de muerte en Estados Unidos ha sido finalmente prohibido. El Tribunal Supremo ech� ayer marcha atr�s, anul� una sentencia propia anterior y declar� inconstitucional la pena de muerte para discapacitados ps�quicos.

El fallo afecta de forma inmediata a 20 estados donde est�n permitidas estas ejecuciones, que hab�an sido declaradas legales en 1989.Sin embargo, el Supremo dej� claro que no cuestiona la constitucionalidad de la pena de muerte, vigente en la mayor parte de los 50 estados de la uni�n.

 De acuerdo con estimaciones no oficiales, un 10% de los 3.700 presos que se encuentran en el pasillo de la muerte sufren alg�n tipo de tara mental.

 ï¿½Han reconocido que la ejecuci�n de los retrasados mentales viola los est�ndares de decencia que marcan el progreso de una sociedad madura�, manifest� Steven Hawkins, de la Coalici�n Contra la Pena de Muerte.

 Situaci�n de los menores

 Este grupo espera que ahora se estudie la situaci�n de los menores de edad que fueron sentenciados a la pena capital. Actualmente, 83 adultos, que cometieron el crimen cuando ten�an menos de 18 a�os, aguardan su ejecuci�n. Dos de ellos ya tienen la fecha fijada.

 Desde 1976, son 44 las personas con taras ps�quicas que han sido ajusticiadas, principalmente en Texas, Virginia y Alabama. Este n�mero podr�a ser superior, seg�n la Coalici�n, ya que varios estados se niegan a realizar un examen previo de inteligencia a los condenados a muerte.

 La �ltima de las ejecuciones tuvo lugar en Oklahoma, en marzo del a�o pasado. Se trataba de Robert Clayton. Su sentencia se cumpli� frente a los llamamientos, especialmente los de la Iglesia cat�lica, que cayeron en los o�dos sordos del gobernador local, el tambi�n cat�lico Frank Keating.

 La lucha para la eliminaci�n de estas sentencias ha logrado que en 18 estados donde se aplica la pena de muerte se haya prohibido la ejecuci�n de personas con alguna discapacidad ps�quica.

 La decisi�n adoptada por el Tribunal Supremo no fue un�nime.El triunvirato conservador, que est� liderado por el juez Antonin Scalia, disinti� de sus otros seis colegas.

 Scalia es el m�s ferviente devoto cat�lico dentro del Supremo y es miembro del Opus Dei, pero mantiene un enfrentamiento con las jerarqu�as cat�licas debido a la defensa que hace de la pena capital.