Constitutional interpretation can sometimes seem abstract and disconnected from the fate of the people whose cases the Supreme Court decides. One could certainly get that feeling from reading the court’s June 26 decision about whether death row inmate Ruben Gutierrez could get the state of Texas to test DNA in its possession.

Gutierrez contends that such a test would show he should not have received a death sentence and be facing execution. But the 6-3 decision did not get to the merits of his request, focusing instead only on the highly technical question of whether judges could even hear it.

Gutierrez claims that Texas state law creates a “statutory entitlement” to DNA testing. More than 50 years ago, the Supreme Court found that if a government establishes a benefit for a group of people, no member of the group can be denied the benefit without being afforded due process of law. Since then, millions of Americans who receive any kind of government benefit

© The Hill