Kahler v. Kansas

Decided March 23, 2020. Elena Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court.

Docket 18-6135 · 589 U.S. 271 (2020) · Cited 60 times

Holding

Due process does not require Kansas to adopt an insanity test that turns on a defendant’s ability to recognize that his crime was morally wrong.

The Court’s statement of the holding, from the opinion’s syllabus. The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. Read the official opinion for authority.

How the Justices voted

Decided 6–3.

“Concurring” means agreeing with the outcome; any split shown is the Court’s judgment, not each Justice’s reasoning. The lineup is the syllabus’s disposition of who wrote and joined each opinion. Source: the opinion’s syllabus (supremecourt.gov).

Precedents cited

Supreme Court decisions this opinion relies on, ordered by how often it cites each. Cases in our collection link through; others are named.

• Clark v. Arizona · 548 U.S. 735 (2006)
• Leland v. Oregon · 343 U.S. 790 (1952)
• Powell v. Texas · 392 U.S. 514 (1968)
• Montana v. Egelhoff · 518 U.S. 37 (1996)
• Snyder v. Massachusetts · 291 U.S. 97 (1934)
• Ake v. Oklahoma · 470 U.S. 68 (1985)
• Patterson v. New York · 432 U.S. 197 (1977)

Cited by

Later Supreme Court opinions in our collection that cite this case.

• City of Grants Pass v. Johnson · 603 U.S. 520 (2024)

Official text

Read the official opinion (PDF, supremecourt.gov)

Explore from here

Elena Kagan’s profile · All Supreme Court opinions · The Supreme Court

Source: Supreme Court of the United States, slip opinions (2020). Citation count from the Free Law Project’s CourtListener bulk data. Data last verified 2026-08-15. Informational only; verify against the primary source before relying. Not a consumer report (FCRA).