In state and federal courts across the country, APA filed legal briefs this year that supported same-sex marriage and legal rights for gay parents, and addressed such timely issues as false confessions, eyewitness misidentification and the reliability of IQ tests in death penalty cases.
These amicus briefs helped explain relevant psychological research to the courts and dispel common misperceptions that could lead to wrongful convictions or human rights violations. Some of APA's amicus briefs have been cited by judges in their decisions, highlighting their impact, says APA General Counsel Nathalie Gilfoyle.
"One of APA's missions is to spread psychological knowledge to advance human welfare," she says. "Our work in the courts is a strong example of doing so."
Same-sex marriage rights
APA filed amicus briefs this year supporting same-sex marriage rights in three states in federal court cases that ultimately succeeded when the Supreme Court declined to review those appeals in October. A wide body of research has found no scientific justification for the denial of marriage rights to same-sex partners, who are just as likely to form stable, committed relationships as heterosexuals, the briefs stated. Bans on same-sex marriage in several states stigmatize these couples and are unconstitutional because they violate the equal-protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, APA argued.
APA filed amicus briefs challenging state constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage in Utah and Oklahoma (Kitchen v. Herbert and Bishop v. Smith). The cases were consolidated on appeal, with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit ruling in June that the bans were unconstitutional. In Bostic v. Schaefer, APA filed a brief opposing Virginia's ban on same-sex marriage in a case where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit upheld a lower court ruling which found the ban was unconstitutional. Same-sex marriage became legal in those three states, along with Indiana and Wisconsin, when the Supreme Court declined to review appeals in those cases.
APA also filed an amicus brief in Bourke v. Beshear, a case in which four same-sex couples who were legally married outside Kentucky challenged that state's ban on same-sex marriage. A decision is pending after oral arguments in August before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 6th Circuit. In Deleon v. Perry, APA filed an amicus brief opposing the ban on same-sex marriage in Texas in an appeal pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. Same-sex marriage rights may be more likely to prevail in those cases given the other circuit court rulings and the Supreme Court's refusal to hear those appeals.
While public opinion and legal rulings on same-sex marriage have shifted dramatically in recent years, APA's advocacy on gay rights extends back to 1975 when the association adopted a resolution to support "the enactment of civil rights legislation at the local, state and federal level that would offer citizens who engage in acts of homosexuality the same protections now guaranteed to others on the basis of race, creed, color, etc."
Gregory Herek, PhD, a psychology professor at the University of California–Davis, has spent decades researching issues relating to homosexuality, and he provided input on APA's amicus briefs. The briefs don't address moral objections to same-sex marriage, which fall outside the purview of science, he says. "APA has been playing an important role with these briefs," he says. "We are careful to stick to the scientific data and what is known at the time."
The 2010 Census recorded more than 111,000 U.S. households headed by same-sex partners with children under age 18. A large number of studies have found that children do not suffer adverse effects from having gay or lesbian parents, but the denial of marriage and parenting rights undermines the stability of those families, several APA briefs stated.
"There is no scientific justification for discrimination," Herek says. "It creates a great deal of insecurity for the couples and their children. It creates a sense among the children that there is something different in a negative way about their own families."
False confessions
Why would anyone confess to a crime he didn't commit? It's a question that puzzles judges and jurors, but there is a wide body of research explaining the risk factors associated with false confessions, says Saul Kassin, PhD, a psychology professor and researcher at John Jay College of Criminal Justice who contributed to several APA amicus briefs on the issue.
APA filed a brief in 2013 in an appeal by Adrian Thomas (People v. Thomas), who confessed under duress to killing his year-old son during a two-day interrogation when he was extremely distraught over his son's death. An autopsy showed the child died from an infection, but prosecutors pursued the case because of the confession, which was the only evidence in the case. In February, the New York Court of Appeals suppressed the confession and ordered a new trial after reviewing the case filings and APA's brief.
Some police tactics can increase the likelihood of false confessions, including lying by interrogators to suspects about evidence or making false claims that a suspect's DNA has been found at the crime scene or that a witness has identified the suspect, the APA brief stated. Deception by interrogators is allowed within certain limits in the United States, but it is banned in most Western countries, says Kassin, who believes the practice should be banned in the United States as well.
The videotaping of interrogations is a key factor in reducing the likelihood of false confessions, and it was the most important recommendation from a 2010 white paper on false confessions from Div. 41 (American Psychology-Law Society), Kassin says. "It will deter the worst police tactics, help protect suspects from false confessions and protect detectives from false claims," he says. "It also will make judges and jurors better fact finders. It's a win-win-win proposition."
In August, APA's Council of Representatives adopted a resolution recommending that all interrogations of felony suspects be videotaped in their entirety to help reduce the risk of false confessions and wrongful convictions.
Research has shown that people with mental illnesses are more likely to confess to crimes they didn't commit than the general population. People with anxiety disorders may panic and say anything to get out of the interrogation room, while those who suffer delusional states may be more suggestible and easily swayed by a detective's leading questions, Kassin says.
Expert testimony about the risk factors associated with false confessions can serve an important role in some trials, especially when there is no other corroborating evidence, the APA brief stated. "People believe they can tell a true confession from a criminal and a false confession from an innocent person, but people usually can't tell the difference," Kassin says. "They overwhelmingly trust confessions, whether they are true or false."
Eyewitness memory
Eyewitnesses' misidentification of innocent suspects also can contribute to wrongful convictions, especially in cases where there is no evidence other than eyewitness testimony, says Brian Cutler, PhD, a psychology professor and associate dean at the University of Ontario Institute of Technology.
"Many people do not fully appreciate how memory works and the factors that influence eyewitness memory," he says. "The result is they sometimes give eyewitness memory too much weight."
Cutler helped draft an amicus brief filed by APA in August in two appeals (Massachusetts v. Gomes and Massachusetts v. Johnson) pending before Massachusetts's highest court. The cases relate to eyewitness misidentification and a jury's right to hear that a crime victim failed to identify the defendant in a police lineup. The brief explained that memory is very malleable and doesn't work like a video recording.
When witnesses view the same suspect in several identification procedures over time, it is difficult to know whether they are remembering the crime itself or just their previous identification of a suspect, the brief stated. "When that first identification of a suspect is wrong, that same wrong decision is likely to carry forward to other identification tests," Cutler says.
Jury instructions about the reliability of eyewitness identifications may help in some cases, Cutler says. Police departments also should institute reforms, such as instructing witnesses to feel no pressure to identify a suspect if they don't recognize him or her in a photo array, he says. Research also has shown that presenting photos of potential suspects sequentially rather than simultaneously may reduce misidentification.
IQ tests in death penalty cases
In a case with life-or-death significance, APA's amicus brief was cited in a Supreme Court opinion in May that overturned a Florida law about the use of IQ tests in death penalty cases for defendants with an intellectual disability. In Hall v. Florida, Freddie Lee Hall was sentenced to death for the 1978 kidnapping, rape and killing of a 21-year-old pregnant woman, along with the killing of a sheriff's deputy who attempted to arrest him and an accomplice. Hall scored 71 on an IQ test, but a state law established a score of 70 as the cutoff for being considered ineligible for the death penalty because of a 2002 Supreme Court ruling that banned the execution of people with intellectual disability.
All IQ tests have a standard error of measurement, with a typical 95 percent confidence level resulting in a range of plus or minus five points, which could have dropped Hall below the 70 score cutoff for the death penalty in Florida, APA's brief stated. IQ tests also can't be used alone and must be part of a more comprehensive assessment of intellectual and adaptive functioning, along with the age of onset of intellectual disability, says Greg Olley, PhD, a psychology professor and researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill who contributed to the APA brief.
The Supreme Court noted in its majority opinion that Hall had a horrific childhood that "appeared to make his deficits in adaptive functioning all the more severe," including frequent beatings by his mother. She also tied him in a sack and swung him over a fire, and she pointed a gun at him while poking him with sticks, according to testimony at Hall's trial.
In its 5-4 majority opinion, the Supreme Court ruled that the Florida law on IQ tests was unconstitutional and cited the APA amicus brief several times. The law "disregards established medical practice" by ignoring the imprecise nature of IQ tests and takes "an IQ score as final and conclusive evidence of a defendant's intellectual capacity, when experts would consider other evidence," the opinion stated.
"The big picture of the Hall decision is that science matters," Olley says. "This is a very good example of APA doing something that was very effective."
Brendan L. Smith is a journalist in Washington, D.C.
