Guerrero v. Johnson
Brief Details
- Case No.: 25-1003
- Brief Filed: September 25, 2026
- Jurisdiction: United States Supreme Court
Key Topics in the Brief
Briefs
Argument(s)
The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (“AEDPA”) balances competing interests in finality, comity, and federalism. On the one hand, it rests on the presumption that state courts are competent to evaluate state and federal claims and protect federal rights. Woods v. Donald, 575 U.S. 312, 316317 (2015) (per curiam). On the other, AEDPA does not “undermin[e] basic habeas corpus principles,” which “play[] a vital role in protecting constitutional rights.” Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 649 (2010) . Accordingly, Congress preserved the ability of federal courts to protect federal rights when claims and their factual predicates were previously unavailable. The Fifth Circuit’s decision here is fully consistent with AEDPA and balances the rights of all parties based on advances in scientific and clinical judgments to ensure that claims of intellectual disability are fully vetted based on the best available science.
Author(s)
Barbara E. Bergman, National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, Tucson, AZ; Joshua Johnson and Carlyle Turner, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Washington, DC; Ethan Nutter, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Austin, TX; Gianna Frye, Vinson & Elkins LLP, Dallas, TX
