preview

Swain V. Kentucky 1965

Decent Essays
Open Document
Without hashing the charges against Batson, the crux of this case is whether or not the prosecution discriminated against Batson by systematically eliminating potential black jurors by using peremptory challenges, thus, violating Batson’s equal protection privilege. At the time, the case law that ruled this issue was Swain v. Alabama (1965), which virtually made it impossible for a defendant to prove that the prosecution was systematically discriminating on the basis of race or gender by putting the burden of proof on the defendant. In the case of Batson v. Kentucky (1986), the Supreme Court took into consideration two areas in examining this case – 1) the defendant made a timely and proper objection to the prosecution’s removal of all possible…show more content…
Alabama (1965). In Swain, the court recognized that a “State's purposeful or deliberate denial to Negroes on account of race of participation as jurors in the administration of justice violates the Equal Protection Clause" (Swain v. Alabama, 1965, pp. 203-204). In this case, that reaffirmed that opinion and cited several other cases that reaffirmed that opinion. However, the Court also cited Strauder v. West Virginia (1880)in that “A defendant has no right to a petit jury composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race” (pp.303, 305). It went on to say “[T]he Equal Protection Clause guarantees the defendant that the State will not exclude members of his race from the jury venire on account of race, or on the false assumption that members of his race as a group are not qualified to serve as jurors. By denying a person participation in jury service on account of his race, the State also unconstitutionally discriminates against the excluded juror. Moreover, selection procedures that purposefully exclude black persons from juries undermine public confidence in the fairness of our system of justice” (Batson v. Kentucky, 1986 pp.
Get Access
Related
Get Access