In a landmark decision taken in 1986, Batson v. Kentucky, the Supreme Court ruled the act of striking jurors in a criminal trial on the grounds of their race as unconstitutional. However, the 1996 Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act made it more intricate for inmates to seek release from prison by arguing their convictions as unconstitutional, encompassing aspects of racial discrimination in jury selection.
These laws are once again under scrutiny. Warren King, a Black man from Georgia, has been sentenced to death and is challenging the state’s right to strike all but one eligible black juror from his case. This instance has cast a spotlight on the method of evaluating racial discrimination in jury selection and the high standard required to challenge a conviction.
King was arrested years ago, under the charges of the murder of Karen Crosby, a convenience store owner. Throughout King’s trial, the pool of potential jurors was downsized to 42 candidates, out of which eight were Black. The assistant district attorney, John Johnson, utilized his right to strike seven out of these eight Black jurors.
Considering Johnson’s actions as racially discriminatory under Batson, King protested, and the trial judge concurred, stating that Johnson had unlawfully struck one potential juror due to her Black ethnicity.
However, finding King’s appeal to be “troubling”, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld the initial decision. The court stated that King had not met the high standard, established by AEDPA, of demonstrating that no reasonable judge could concur with the trial court’s conclusion that Johnson had justifiably struck down six remaining Black jurors.
In his latest plea, King v. Emmons, King is imploring the justices to review and reverse the 11th Circuit’s ruling. King argues that considering Johnson’s conduct – his criticism of Batson, the fact that he struck one juror because she was Black and his removal of almost 88% of Black jurors as opposed to only 8% of white jurors, it is unreasonable to infer anything other than a violation of Batson.
This raised questions about the degree and impact of racial discrimination in jury selection, the appeal process for those convicted and the high burden of proof required to challenge such convictions, invoking a discourse on the fairness and equality of the legal system.