The Supreme Court is expected to issue rulings today, including a decision in the appeal of a Texas death row inmate whose lawyers argue should be spared from execution because he is mentally ill.

Any bets as to how the right-leaning court will rule?

PANETTI V. QUARTERMAN, No 06-6407
(Argued April 18, 2007)
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed on January 5 to hear another death penalty case from Texas, this one involving a defendant who may be mentally incompetent. In 1986, the Supreme Court held that it is unconstitutional to execute an inmate who is presently insane. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit ruled that Scott Panetti, who was allowed to defend himself in his Texas trial despite his schizophrenia and 14 stints in mental hospitals, and who says the devil compelled his actions, was aware that he committed a crime and that he was to be punished. The question for the Supreme Court is whether mere awareness of one’s acts can be equated with mental competence, or whether the person also needs to rationally understand what is taking place. The National Alliance on Mental Illness had urged the Justices to take the case.

Read: (pdf)
Petitioner’s Cert. Petition.
Petitioner’s Brief
ABA Brief
Legal Historians’ Brief
Medical Association Brief

The Question presented is:

Does the Eighth Amendment permit the execution of a death row inmate who has a factual awareness of the reason for his execution but who, because of a severe mental illness, has a delusional belief as to why the State is executing him, and thus does not appreciate that his execution is intended to seek retribution for his capital crime?