Supreme Court Rules States Can Bar Insanity Defense
WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court ruled Monday that states can prevent criminal defendants from pleading insanity without violating their constitutional rights.
The justices’ 6-3 decision came in the case Kahler v. Kansas.
As recounted in the decision, James Kraig Kahler was sentenced to death for killing his estranged wife, two teenage daughters and his wife’s grandmother.
Kahler wanted to mount an insanity defense, but Kansas is one of four states that eliminated a defendant’s ability to plead not guilty by reason of insanity.
Idaho, Montana and Utah are the others. Alaska also places limits on when the insanity defense may be used.
A majority of the justices found that due process does not require a state to adopt an insanity test that turns on a defendant’s ability to recognize his crime was morally wrong.
The decision is likely to encourage states across the country to toughen standards for defendants who wish to plead not guilty by reason of insanity.
Writing for the majority, Justice Elena Kagan concluded, “Kansas takes account of mental health at both trial and sentencing. It has just not adopted the particular insanity defense Kahler would like. That choice is for Kansas to make — and, if it wishes, to remake and remake again as the future unfolds.”
She was joined in the majority by Chief Justice John Roberts, and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.
Justice Stephen Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which he was joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor.
In it, Breyer argued that Kansas “has eliminated the core of a defense that has existed for centuries: that the defendant, due to mental illness, lacked the mental capacity necessary for his conduct to be considered morally blameworthy.”
In The News
RICHMOND, Va, - Virginia’s General Assembly passed a jury sentencing reform bill this week that is revolutionary for the state but is already being done nearly everywhere else. The bill allows juries to decide whether a criminal defendant is guilty but requires judges to set the... Read More
SAN JOSE, Calif. - When the push to eliminate California's cash bail system began in the state Legislature several years ago, the battle lines were clearly drawn. On one side were civil rights groups and criminal justice reform advocates arguing that cash bail is unjust because it allows wealthy... Read More
DALLAS — The Pakistani immigrant was desperate. COVID-19 was spreading through the Prairieland compound, an isolated immigrant detention center about an hour southwest of Dallas. The diabetic man’s time in the facility became too much. He made a tough decision: Rather than suffer longer in detention... Read More
After nearly 20 years of disappointment and dead ends, authorities charged two men with murder in the cold-case killing of hip-hop pioneer Jam Master Jay, who was gunned down in his Queens music studio in 2002 during what prosecutors described as a drug-related homicide. Ronald “Tinard”... Read More
LOS ANGELES — Early on a Thursday morning in February, two men in suits rapped on the door of the South Los Angeles apartment that Gadseel Quiñonez shares with his little brother. The men were from the Los Angeles Police Department’s Professional Standards Bureau — the... Read More
WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court grilled former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn’s lawyer about his claim that a trial-court judge has no choice but to grant the U.S. Justice Department’s surprise motion to dismiss the criminal case. During a rare review by the full appellate... Read More