This Note will further investigate how the Court reached the correct holding that Kansas's statute does not violate the Due Process Clause. Part II gives historical background of the evolution of the insanity defense and its varied application. Part III recounts Kahler's story and the procedural history leading up to this opinion. Part IV analyzes how the majority reached its conclusion and the counterarguments presented by the dissent. Part V concludes by acknowledging this case will add to state freedom in formulating insanity defenses, but that its actual impact is uncertain because the Court avoided answering whether states can eliminate the defense altogether
Avoiding the Question: The Court's Decision to Leave the Insanity Defense in State Hands in Kahler v. Kansas,
2020 Pepp. L. Rev.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.pepperdine.edu/plr/vol2020/iss1/5