In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Thomas Miller-El, a Texas death row inmate, is entitled to a new trial in light of strong evidence of racial bias during jury selection at his original trial. In choosing a jury to try Miller-El, a black defendant, prosecutors struck 10 of the 11 qualified black panelists. The Supreme Court said that the decision by the Texas court finding no discrimination in the process “blinks reality” and was unreasonable and erroneous in light of the significant evidence of discrimination.
Justice Souter, writing for the majority, set out the evidence that race governed who was allowed on the jury, including: disparate questioning of white and black jurors, jury “shuffling,” a culture of bias within the prosecutor’s office, and the fact that the prosecutor’s race-neutral explanations for the strikes were so far at odds with the evidence that the explanations themselves indicate discriminatory intent.
The decision serves as a model for the lower courts in applying the Supreme Court’s opinion in Batson v. Kentucky, where it held it is unconstitutional to strike jurors solely on the basis of race. Today’s decison found that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit should have overturned the Texas court’s denial of relief. Miller-el will be granted a new trial. The case is Miller-El v. Dretke, No. 03-9659. (Associated Press, June 13, 2005). Read the complete decision. See DPIC’s page on the Miller-El case. See also Race. To view a video (need RealPlayer) about the Miller-El case, click here.
In a related case, Johnson v. California, the Court today struck down California’s standard for reviewing Batson v. Kentucky challenges as too demanding. California required a defendant to present not merely enough evidence to permit an inference that discrimination has occurred, but sufficiently strong evidence to establish that the challenges, if not explained, were more likely than not based on race. The case is Johnson v. California, No. 04-6964.
