Supreme Court to Decide if Texas Can Rebut New Mental Health Evidence

The U.S. Supreme Court is set to hear arguments this Wednesday regarding the procedural path for Texas death row inmates to introduce new medical evidence.

The case centers on Dexter Johnson, who was convicted in 2006 of killing 23-year-old Maria Aparece. His execution was originally slated for May 2019 but was paused after a federal court accepted a claim of intellectual disability. That claim was not raised during his initial trial.

Johnson’s legal team introduced the disability argument days before his scheduled execution. They relied on a 2013 update to the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. That revision moved the focus away from rigid IQ thresholds toward deficits in adaptive functioning. Under the new framework, a trial expert withdrew a previous conclusion, and two additional experts determined Johnson met the definition of intellectual disability.

Ethan Nutter, an attorney representing the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers in an amicus brief, noted that the medical community’s understanding of the condition has shifted over the last two decades. He stated that the Supreme Court has ruled it unconstitutional to execute individuals with such disabilities.

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice filed for review in February 2026. Its brief argued that the Fifth Circuit’s decision removes strict limits on claims based on new evidence. The department contended that the delay denies justice to the families of victims.

Protasio Aparece, the victim’s father, also filed a brief. He expressed an interest in seeing justice carried out for his daughter and preventing other families from enduring similar delays.

The central question for the justices is whether federal courts should accept a second or successive habeas petition in these circumstances. A decision is expected by June 2027.