Bobby James Moore was sentenced to death, and Texas courts repeatedly rejected his claim that he was intellectually disabled and therefore constitutionally ineligible for execution. After the Supreme Court previously vacated the state court’s analysis, Texas reached the same conclusion on remand. The Supreme Court again reversed. The record showed longstanding intellectual and adaptive difficulties beginning in childhood, and the state court had repeated the analytical errors identified in the earlier decision, including reliance on outdated clinical standards and stereotyped assumptions about adaptive functioning. The Court held that the state court’s determination was inconsistent with the constitutional rule established in Atkins and applied in the Court’s later cases. Justice Alito dissented, arguing that the Court was improperly acting as a factfinder and should have remanded for application of a clearer rule. The majority reversed the state court’s judgment, leaving Moore’s intellectual-disability claim to be resolved under the governing constitutional standards.