![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jun. 13th, 2005
What the hell?
Jun. 13th, 2005 09:56 pmSupreme Court Rules for Texan on Death Row
Okay, race and the death penalty has been a big judicial issue recently. This article (reg req, but it's free) basically goes through all of the Supreme court decisions about it including the original Batson Decision that declared that "a prosecutor whose use of peremptory challenges raises an inference of discrimination has to provide an explanation, which the judge can either accept as "race neutral" or reject as a pretext for discrimination". (1986).
Since then, who has been the dissenting Supreme Court Justice on just about every ruling in favor of a minority death row inmate? Judge Clarence Thomas. Wow. I mean, I just have to say, wierd. And you can call me insensitive for saying so, but still.
The justices ruled once before in 2003 that "The evidence of discrimination was substantial enough to require the appeals court to give Mr. Miller-El a hearing" with regards to the fact that 10 of the 11 black potential jurors on the case were dismissed despite answering the same as their white counterparts in regard to their opinion of the death penalty. The only dissenting opinion? Judge Thomas.
It came back to the courts this year thanks to the efforts of Mr. Miller-El's pro-bono lawyer after the state and federal appeals courts in texas still said that there had been nothing wrong w/ the jury selection in regards to discrimination.
After examining the evidence at the behest of Miller-El's attorney again, Justice Souter, writing the majority opinion,"compared white and black jurors who had expressed similar views on the death penalty during initial questioning; the whites were retained and the blacks removed. The prosecution's reasons for the different treatment, he said, "are so far at odds with the evidence that pretext is the fair conclusion, indicating the very discrimination the explanations were meant to deny."
And the dissenting justices? Once again, Judge Thomas. Also, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia.
And just for one last, oh wow, with regards to Justice Thomas's decisions:
The court issued a second ruling on Monday on race and jury selection. The question in Johnson v. California, No. 04-6964, was how much evidence of possible discrimination must be presented to invoke the Batson decision's requirement of a race-neutral explanation.
The California Supreme Court had required evidence that discrimination was "more likely than not" the reason for the peremptory strike. But Justice Stevens, writing for the 8-to-1 majority on Monday, said that this standard was too onerous. It was sufficient to have "an inference" of discrimination at this initial stage, he said.
Justice Thomas was the lone dissenter.
Sadly, I can't remember during which administrations each of these was appointed. Thomas was during Bush, Sr. right? I know, I could look it up on the internet, but I'm too disgusted right now. Retreating to fandom is much more appealing.
Okay, race and the death penalty has been a big judicial issue recently. This article (reg req, but it's free) basically goes through all of the Supreme court decisions about it including the original Batson Decision that declared that "a prosecutor whose use of peremptory challenges raises an inference of discrimination has to provide an explanation, which the judge can either accept as "race neutral" or reject as a pretext for discrimination". (1986).
Since then, who has been the dissenting Supreme Court Justice on just about every ruling in favor of a minority death row inmate? Judge Clarence Thomas. Wow. I mean, I just have to say, wierd. And you can call me insensitive for saying so, but still.
The justices ruled once before in 2003 that "The evidence of discrimination was substantial enough to require the appeals court to give Mr. Miller-El a hearing" with regards to the fact that 10 of the 11 black potential jurors on the case were dismissed despite answering the same as their white counterparts in regard to their opinion of the death penalty. The only dissenting opinion? Judge Thomas.
It came back to the courts this year thanks to the efforts of Mr. Miller-El's pro-bono lawyer after the state and federal appeals courts in texas still said that there had been nothing wrong w/ the jury selection in regards to discrimination.
After examining the evidence at the behest of Miller-El's attorney again, Justice Souter, writing the majority opinion,"compared white and black jurors who had expressed similar views on the death penalty during initial questioning; the whites were retained and the blacks removed. The prosecution's reasons for the different treatment, he said, "are so far at odds with the evidence that pretext is the fair conclusion, indicating the very discrimination the explanations were meant to deny."
And the dissenting justices? Once again, Judge Thomas. Also, Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and Justice Antonin Scalia.
And just for one last, oh wow, with regards to Justice Thomas's decisions:
The court issued a second ruling on Monday on race and jury selection. The question in Johnson v. California, No. 04-6964, was how much evidence of possible discrimination must be presented to invoke the Batson decision's requirement of a race-neutral explanation.
The California Supreme Court had required evidence that discrimination was "more likely than not" the reason for the peremptory strike. But Justice Stevens, writing for the 8-to-1 majority on Monday, said that this standard was too onerous. It was sufficient to have "an inference" of discrimination at this initial stage, he said.
Justice Thomas was the lone dissenter.
Sadly, I can't remember during which administrations each of these was appointed. Thomas was during Bush, Sr. right? I know, I could look it up on the internet, but I'm too disgusted right now. Retreating to fandom is much more appealing.
