Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Civil Rights and Discrimination Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Faculty Publications

University of South Carolina

Equal protection

Discipline
Publication Year

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Civil Rights and Discrimination

Removal Of Women And African-Americans In Jury Selection In South Carolina Capital Cases, 1997- 2012, Ann M. Eisenberg Jul 2017

Removal Of Women And African-Americans In Jury Selection In South Carolina Capital Cases, 1997- 2012, Ann M. Eisenberg

Faculty Publications

The Supreme Court’s May 2016 decision in Foster v. Chatman involved smoking-gun evidence that the State of Georgia discriminated against African-Americans in jury selection during Foster’s 1987 capital trial. Foster was decided on the thirtieth anniversary of Batson v. Kentucky, the first in the line of cases to prohibit striking prospective jurors on the basis of their race or gender. But the evidence of discrimination for Batson challenges is rarely so obvious and available as it was in Foster.

Where litigants have struggled to produce evidence of discrimination in individual cases, empirical studies have been able to assess jury selection …


The Contradiction Between Equal Protection's Meaning And Its Legal Substance: How Deliberate Indifference Can Cure It, Derek W. Black Jan 2006

The Contradiction Between Equal Protection's Meaning And Its Legal Substance: How Deliberate Indifference Can Cure It, Derek W. Black

Faculty Publications

This Article highlights the inherent ambiguities of racial antidiscrimination’s core legal language: “equal protection under the law” and “discrimination based on race.” It then analyzes how and why the Court has never answered fundamental questions regarding the meaning of these terms. Thus, this Article answers these fundamental questions itself by exploring the original intent behind the Equal Protection Clause. Against this backdrop, this Article reveals how the Court’s standard for assessing discrimination claims, the intent doctrine, assumes a meaning for equal protection that is inconsistent with its original meaning. Rather than reflecting equal protection’s meaning, the standard lacks any basis …