Xavier Becerra, California's former Attorney General and current gubernatorial frontrunner, pushed state officials to inflate a Black death row inmate's IQ test scores to overcome a legal barrier to execution, according to records reviewed by The Intercept.
The case involves a defendant with intellectual disabilities. Federal law bars executing individuals with significantly subaverage intellectual functioning. Becerra's office sought to challenge the inmate's legitimate intellectual disability diagnosis by artificially raising IQ assessment results, effectively bypassing constitutional protections.
This episode reflects a broader pattern in Becerra's record as Attorney General. He consistently opposed police accountability reforms, blocked transparency measures, and aggressively defended California's death penalty system. His office pursued capital cases despite growing national consensus on the death penalty's unreliability and racial disparities.
Becerra's conduct raises questions about his judicial philosophy and commitment to civil rights protections. The case demonstrates how prosecutorial power can override scientific evidence and constitutional safeguards when officials prioritize execution over procedural fairness.
Death penalty abolitionists and civil rights groups cite this history as evidence that Becerra cannot be trusted to reform the criminal justice system. The case contradicts his public positioning as a progressive Democrat, given his aggressive defense of capital punishment and his willingness to manipulate evidence to enable executions.
As Becerra builds his gubernatorial campaign, this record threatens to undermine his appeal to Democratic voters who increasingly oppose the death penalty. California voters have shown growing skepticism of capital punishment in recent years, making Becerra's aggressive death penalty advocacy a potential liability.
The incident underscores how individual prosecutors shape life-and-death outcomes. Becerra's actions directly endangered an intellectually disabled person's life through what critics characterize as scientific fraud. His record suggests he prioritizes convictions and executions over constitutional protections and accuracy.