"Grant stay of execution for Warren Hill," is the statement of American Bar Association President Laurel Bellows. Here is her complete statement:
Serious questions of fact and law are issues in all death penalty cases, and they are often in dispute. But not in the case of Warren Hill, a Georgia prisoner scheduled to be executed on July 15. The facts are clear: All the mental health experts who have examined Hill agree that he is “mentally retarded.” The law is also clear: The United States Supreme Court held in 2002 that it is unconstitutional to execute persons with mental retardation.
Georgia requires a uniquely high standard of proof to demonstrate this condition. The Supreme Court should decide whether the imposition of this stringent and extreme burden unconstitutionally risks the execution of persons with mental retardation like Hill. But unless Hill’s execution is stayed, he will be executed before the court can make its decision.
For these reasons, and because the American Bar Association has long opposed the execution of persons with mental retardation, the ABA strongly urges that Hill’s execution be stayed until his pending Supreme Court petition can be considered and decided on the merits. A stay of execution is not only appropriate in these compelling circumstances — it is what justice demands in order to prevent an unconscionable result.
Earlier coverage of Warren Hill's case begins with the preceding post.