The U.S. Supreme Court revived a Black Mississippi death row prisoner’s challenge to the composition of the jury that convicted him. The Court held that state courts improperly rejected his claim under Batson v. Kentucky, determining they failed to adhere to established constitutional procedures intended to prevent racial discrimination during jury selection.
UC Davis law professors Vikram David Amar and Alan E. Brownstein published an analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision in Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo, which allowed ICE to use race and other demographic factors in selecting individuals for immigration investigation, and criticized Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s opinion for relying on the controversial Los Angeles v. Lyons decision and for equating race with other demographic factors.
The U.S. Supreme Court will consider whether to hear Pitchford v. Cain, a case raising allegations of racial discrimination in jury selection, which echoes the Court’s 2019 ruling in Flowers v. Mississippi and could have far-reaching implications for the enforcement of equal protection in jury selection.
The Supreme Court took hard right turns in major First Amendment cases, but also sided with civil-rights plaintiffs and criminal defendants in lower-profile cases, and overrode lower courts to let Trump administration policies proceed.
Justice Clarence Thomas’s dissent in the Supreme Court case Gutierrez v. Saenz argued that the Constitution does not require states to offer any postconviction relief, effectively closing the courthouse doors once a conviction is handed down.
By Jaanvi Kaur WASHINGTON, DC – Civil rights groups are trying again to push the federal government…