Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1706242
 
 

Footnotes (23)



 


 



Response to 'Snyder v. Lousiana: Continuing the Historical Trend Towards Increased Scrutiny of Peremptory Challenges'


Bidish Sarma


University of Califonia, Berkeley School of Law; The Justice Center's Capital Appeals Project

October 20, 2010

Michigan Law Review First Impressions, Vol. 109, p. 42, 2010

Abstract:     
John P. Bringewatt's recent note makes several important observations about the Supreme Court's opinion in Snyder v. Louisiana. Although he provides reasonable support for the claim that Snyder represents a sea change in Batson jurisprudence, the US Supreme Court's fresh opinion in Thaler v. Haynes (rendered on February 22, 2010) reads the Snyder majority opinion narrowly and suggests the possibility that Snyder is not as potent as it should be. The Haynes per curiam's guarded reading of Snyder signals the need for courts to continue to conduct the bird's-eye cumulative analysis that the Court performed in Miller-El v. Dretke [hereinafter Miller-El II]. If lawyers challenging discriminatory peremptory strikes and trial courts replicate Snyder's single-juror approach but ignore concomitant Miller-El circumstantial evidence of intentional discrimination, Snyder may (counterintuitively) sap Miller-El II of its on-the-ground transformative potential. In other words, lawyers should not rely too much on the "more individualized focus" observed and applauded by the author because a narrow framing of a Batson challenge in the Snyder opinion's image (rather than a wider framing with a focus on the Miller-El factors) may fail in front of courts that view Snyder differently than does Bringewatt. A slightly different interpretation of the historical arc of the relevant cases and a critical reconsideration of Snyder's circumstances foreshadow the outcome in Haynes and reveal nuances that suggest problems with Bringewatt's theory.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 6

Keywords: Batson, Race, Racial Discrimination, Jury Selection, Snyder v. Louisiana, Miller-El v. Dretke

JEL Classification: K14

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: November 10, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Sarma, Bidish, Response to 'Snyder v. Lousiana: Continuing the Historical Trend Towards Increased Scrutiny of Peremptory Challenges' (October 20, 2010). Michigan Law Review First Impressions, Vol. 109, p. 42, 2010. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1706242

Contact Information

Bidish Sarma (Contact Author)
University of Califonia, Berkeley School of Law ( email )
391 Simon Hall
UC Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720
United States
The Justice Center's Capital Appeals Project ( email )
636 Baronne St.
New Orleans, LA 70113
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 364
Downloads: 30
Footnotes:  23

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo6 in 0.344 seconds