After passing the House unanimously (172-0), the Senate Judiciary Committee heard and discussed House Bill 123 (HB 123), sponsored by Representative Bill Werkheiser (Glennville). This bill seeks to protect individuals with intellectual disability (ID) and end the unconstitutional practice of sentencing them to death.

We are thrilled to share that our bill passed the committee and is now eligible for a vote by the full Senate. The Supreme Court has held that executing people with intellectual disability is unconstitutional. This bill will ensure that we do not.

Please refer to our toolkit, contact your senator, and urge them to VOTE YES on HB 123 as is.

The Senate Judiciary committee made two changes to the bill before passing it.

Under the latest version of the bill, if a person living with intellectual disability is found guilty, they may be sentenced to life or life without parole (LWOP). Under current law and the version of HB 123 that passed the House, a defendant in a capital trial who is found guilty but determined to have intellectual disability receives a life sentence. While we categorically oppose LWOP, especially for people with diminished culpability due to age or intellectual disability, we continue to support HB 123, as the amended bill would still better protect people with ID from being sentenced to death.

The second change made by the Senate Judiciary Committee requires the defense to provide the prosecution with any evidence it intends to present at the pretrial hearing on intellectual disability. Likewise, the prosecution must provide the defense with any evidence it intends to use in opposition to a determination of intellectual disability.

HB 123 is a long-overdue reform that makes two important changes to Georgia law:

• It lowers the standard of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to preponderance of the evidence, aligning Georgia with nearly every other state.
• It ensures that determining intellectual disability is separate from determining guilt in capital cases. The Supreme Court has said that evidence about the crime is irrelevant to the determination of intellectual disability. Separating the determinations of guilt and intellectual disability will improve accuracy and reduce bias in the decision-making process.

We will continue to keep you updated. If you haven’t already, please consider subscribing to our legislative tracker.