Today in Supreme Court History: March 1, 1880

3/1/1880: Strauder v. West Virginia decided.

Comments

[Dan Schiavetta]

We're getting into the heavy season now so I'll report ten cases every day, instead of five. I suppose this means I'll get twice as many wrong.

Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (decided March 1, 1880): Fourteenth Amendment violated by state statute restricting jury duty to whites; the Court's dictum as to some restrictions being permissible was overruled by Taylor v. Louisiana, 1975, insofar as restricting it to males

Swint v. Chambers Co. Comm'n, 514 U.S. 35 (decided March 1, 1995): the Court once again takes on the persistent issue of discretionary "pendent appellate jurisdiction", i.e., appealing a normally non-appealable order along with an appealable one; here, in a §1983 suit against police officers and county arising from a narcotics raid on a nightclub, it holds that officers' appeal from order denying them qualified immunity (automatically appealable despite not being a final judgment) does not bring along with it county's appeal from order denying summary judgment; claim against county involved different issues (e.g., formation of policy), and the Circuit Court had no discretion to hear it (cf. National Fire Ins. v. Bartolazo, 27 F.3d 518, where in an insurance coverage dispute court heard appeal of denial of plaintiff's summary judgment motion -- nonfinal order -- along with appeal of granting of defendant's, because the issues were the same and the lower court's decision disposed of the case)

Marks v. United States, 430 U.S. 188 (decided March 1, 1977): new definition of impermissible "obscenity" announced in Miller v. California, 1973, did not apply to pending prosecutions (Court also makes the point that when it issues a plurality decision, its "holding" for precedential purposes will be the opinion of the judge(s) who concurred on the narrowest ground)

Freedman v. Maryland, 380 U.S. 51 (decided March 1, 1965): another obscenity case: can't show a banned movie until you get a judge to overrule the censor's order (though conviction vacated anyway because state statute didn't provide for prompt judicial review)

Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (decided March 1, 2005): Eighth Amendment prohibits executing those under 18 when crime committed (overruling Stanford v. Kentucky, 1989)

FTC v. Sperry and Hutchinson Co., 405 U.S. 233 (decided March 1, 1972): Remember S&H green stamps? I do, though my mother never spent time pasting stamps into those redeemable booklets (she was too busy raising six kids). The FTC ordered S&H to cease a marketing scheme that supposedly unfairly inhibited competition. Court holds that though the FTC can enjoin practices that violate neither the letter nor the spirit of anticompetition statutes, in this case its order made no findings and gave no reasons. (From the opinion we learn that since 1896 S&H had issued more than a trillion stamps.)

The Mary Ann, 21 U.S. 380 (decided March 1, 1823): Captain of slave ship screwed up the paperwork (one invoice per slave!) but Marshall vacates forfeiture because the indictment was also was screwed up for lack of specifics; sends it back for correction

Lockhart v. United States, 577 U.S. 347 (decided March 1, 2016): child pornography statute increasing sentence if prior "aggravated sexual abuse, sexual abuse, or abusive sexual conduct involving a minor or ward" (emphasis added) applied to prior conviction of abuse of adult

FCC v. AT&T, Inc., 562 U.S. 397 (decided March 1, 2011): corporations don't have "personal privacy" rights so as to resist FOIA requests (FCC had granted FOIA request for records AT&T had provided to law enforcement in investigation of overcharging government) though they do have the "trade secrets" privilege

Arizona v. Evans, 514 U.S. 1 (decided March 1, 1995): marijuana seized as result of arrest warrant that had already been quashed held admissible; "good faith" exception to exclusionary rule because due to clerical error police hadn't been told of the quash (the warrant, issued by a town judge because defendant hadn't shown for a hearing as to traffic violations, was quashed by another judge when he did show several days later, apparently by clerk notating in ledger without telling defendant)

[Commenter_XY]

S&H stamps; I remember those captcrisis. I helped my mother as a toddler pasting those stamps into books so we could get stuff.

[Dan Schiavetta]

It was a good way for her to make you feel important!

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

A few of my paper route customers provided completed (or partially completed) books of S&H Green Stamps as tips. I redeemed them for blank audio cassettes (Capitol? Ampex?) and, perhaps, a wagon.

I have a vague recollection of blue stamps, too.

[Frank Drackman]

Finally something we have in common, Jerry. LA Times 74-77, $6 for a monthly subscription (I got to keep 90 cents) $2.40 for those cheap skates who only wanted the Sunday paper, and forgot what it was for those weirdos who wanted every day except Sunday.
No trading stamps, but one Officer who didn't have the cash offered me his Watch (like in "Trains/Planes & Automobiles") Unfortunately I didn't have a Fence and Paper wouldn't take watches. Hardest job I ever had, and once in a while the guy from the other paper (Orange Co Register) would poach a few of my papers, and I'd take a few of his, paid for my first car with that job.

Frank

[John F. Carr]

At the time of The Mary Ann importation of slaves was illegal and transport of slaves by ship within the United States required a permit. The master needed a duplicate manifest, not one invoice per slave, but two copies each listing every slave on board.

The case hints at an issue that still arises today: specific unanimity in criminal cases where there are alternative ways of committing a crime. The ship had departed New York or Perth Amboy. If it left New York without the proper paperwork it was subject to forfeiture. If it left Perth Amboy without the proper paperwork it was subject to forfeiture. The prosecutor was unsure which port and charged "New York and Perth Amboy". The Supreme Court did not like this vague pleading. If the prosecutor was unsure he should file two counts, one for each port, and the proof at trial would probably disprove one of them.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks for figuring that out.

Reading those old cases usually makes my eyes cross. The language is so roundabout, and uses terms which are obsolete.

[The Margrave of Azilia]

The prosecutors were trying to do a Capone?

“Your paperwork for these slaves you’re trafficking is not in order!”

[Dan Schiavetta]

"The one unchanging constant in the universe: the bureaucratic mentality."

-- Dr. McCoy, in one of the Star Trek movies (III, I think)

[The Margrave of Azilia]

So *that's* what Mary Ann and the rest were doing on their supposed three hour tour. I am so disillusioned.

[apedad]

Re: Strauder v. West Virginia

Facts of the case

A West Virginia law declared that only whites may serve on juries.

Question

Does the state law barring blacks from jury service violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment?

Conclusion (7 - 2)

Yes. Strong, writing for the majority, declared that to deny citizen participation in the administration of justice solely on racial grounds "is practically a brand upon them, affixed by law; an assertion of their inferiority, and a stimulant to that race prejudice which is an impediment to securing to individuals of the race that equal justice which the law aims to secure to all others." (oyez)

As captcrisis noted above, "While a victory for the rights of black defendants and an important early civil rights case, Strauder v. West Virginia upheld the right of states to bar women or other classes from juries by holding, in the words of Justice Strong, that a state "may confine the selection to males, to freeholders, to citizens, to persons within certain ages, or to persons having educational qualifications. We do not believe the Fourteenth Amendment was ever intended to prohibit this.... Its aim was against discrimination because of race or color." (wiki)

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

How does this application to a state square with the Slaughterhouse cases gutting the 14th?

[apedad]

Slaughterhouse decision was in 1873.

This case was decided in 1880, so I guess it overrode the Slaughterhouse decision - at least in the narrow decision about black males voting.

[Frank Drackman]

Black Guy murders his wife with an axe and gets off, spends rest of life searching for "The Real Killer" yay Justice!!!!!!

[SRG]

Can anyone point me to the "good faith exception" clause in 4A?

[not guilty]

The "good faith exception" to the exclusionary rule, recognized in United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897 (1984), is a judicial creation. But then, so is recognition of the rule itself in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383 (1914), as well as its application to state prosecutions in Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 (1961).

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks.

The GF exception doesn't seem to apply to the people being arrested. "Ignorance of the law is no excuse."

[windycityattorney]

To be fair; the 4th amendment states a judicial preference for warrants and requires warrants to have probable cause. What it doesn't do nor prescribe is a remedy for when the amendment is violated. Nor did the 5th amendment right against self incrimination.

So what do you do when evidence is seized without a warrant or without probable cause? What do you do when a person in custody has a confession beat out of them?

Common sense would say: the evidence illegally seized can't be used by the state (whose agents procured it) and for the 5th; the government can't use the confession that was coerced. Its a limited remedy aimed directly at the conduct which led to some constitutional violation.

If the cops realize all the confessions they gained from beating their arrestees are thrown out; maybe they would learn to stop beating them. If illegal searches mean the bad guy gets off his charges, maybe they would learn to use legal searches instead??

[Dan Schiavetta]

I think they just like to beat people up, in those instances where that happens. As far as illegal seizures, I asked a policeman about this once. He said seizing a gun illegally might make it impossible to prosecute the possession, but at least they got it out of the guy’s hands.

[Frank Drackman]

Look in the Penumbra, it's next to the "Killing Babies" right

[Bob from Ohio]

"Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (decided March 1, 1880): Fourteenth Amendment violated by state statute restricting jury duty to whites"

That's why we had mixed race Southern juries from then on.

[Frank Drackman]

But we didn't! All White Juries were the rule up until, umm, now in some cases, what a mo-roon! oh wait a minute.......

[Dan Schiavetta]

Thanks! According to the article you linked to, the defendant deliberately picked an unobjectionable, non-sexual movie so that the state couldn't argue obscenity.

[apedad]

You're assuming Frankie actually knows who his father is.

[Frank Drackman]

Yes, something really non-sexual, like "Song of the South"

[Frank Drackman]

Does anyone really know? Did you see your mom and Dad (redacted)?? and even I don't claim sentience for Sperm/Ova. My Dad was 6'4 (still alive, but lost an inch or 2 with the degenerative disc) still has the 20/10 vision, and right handed, I'm 5'8 had to get PRK, and lefty, you might be onto something Queenie

[Sarcastr0]

Frank is one of the best blocks I've done.

He thinks he's a cut-up, freaking out the squares with truth bombs coated in edgy humor.

But he's just a shallow asshole. His humor is 1970s schoolyard shit. Nothing to add, not even amusing to mock because he's so disengaged from anything but getting a reaction.

[Dr. Ed 2]

The problem with censoring that film is that it created a cultural divide between those who had seen it and the Baby Boomers who hadn't. "Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah" is a good example.

[Mr. Bumble]

no one cares.

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

I don't recall you ever adding much at all, not even lame humor.

[Bob from Ohio]

Frank is fairly funny, and makes some good points too.

[Dan Schiavetta]

From what I understand, Chandler actually related slave folk tales fairly accurately.

[Dan Schiavetta]

Sorry — meant to say Joel Chandler Harris

[Sarcastr0]

I disagree. I think I challenge plenty of people's bad arguments and wrong facts.

But to each there own. If you think I'm at Frank's level, for the love of god block me for your own mental well being!

[Mr. Bumble]

Like I said, no one cares.

[Frank Drackman]

Brer Rabbit: I m-m-m-m-mean w-w-w-whatever you do B-B-B-Br'er Fox, whatever you do, but please, please Br'er Fox, pleeeaaase don't fling me into that briar patch!

[Points to the briar patch]

Br'er Fox: Uhh... Briar patch?

[Camera zooms into the briar patch]

Br'er Fox: Briar patch!

[Frank Drackman]

Looks like Sarcastro through a Block Party and nobody came

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

These are your fans, Volokh Conspirators.

And the reason your faculty and administration colleagues hope you find other jobs.

[Michael P]

Racist troll 2, Sarcastr 0, so to speak.

[Nige]

I guess his calling for a female judge to be gang raped chimes with your calling for a male one to be hung. Funny, and good points, to some.

[Frank Drackman]

Sarcastro?, yeah, almost feel sorry for the poor boob, he's like that Monkey in "2001" trying to prove his point with a stick.

[Frank Drackman]

for a supposedly "Woke" Queen, you're(happy now?) surprisingly unwoke with the struggle of the Southpaw in Amurica, years of living in the Right-Man's world results in many People of Left having trouble with those Left-Brain constructs of Grammar, Spelling, whatever that term is for words that sound the same but have different meanings, the medical term is "Developmental Language Disorder" now a days they pump you full of Ritalin and cut off your dick, in the 70's mom locked me in a Closet (actually got me one of those "Library Desks" and made me study until I could right good English,

Frank "I'm a very good Driver, Judge Wapner at 4"

[Frank Drackman]

"Most Loved Figure"??
Jesus????
Good movie and I don't even believe in the guy (Jesus I mean, I'm a firm believer in Kelsey Grammer)
https://jesusrevolution.movie/

[Bob from Ohio]

"attention seeking doltish puerile troll"

But enough about you.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

We live in an age of conservative populism

If you are referring to what the conservatives are doing with their time, maybe. Conservatives have won the popular vote in a presidential election once in, what, 30 years? They are bystanders with respect to our strongest teaching and research institutions, our leading entertainments (television, comedians, movies, musicians), our mainstream media, our most successful and educated communities. Their dwindling electoral coalition consists mainly of poorly educated, economically inadequate, backward, bigoted, white, rural voters, in a nation becoming less religious, less rural, less bigoted, less backward, and more diverse each day.

We live in an age of conservative decline (mirroring the decades of decline of most conservative-controlled communities and their economies).

Most of the smarter conservatives recognize this. It explains the desperation that has precipitated Trump, intellectual hypocrisy, QAnon, intensifying intolerance, birtherism, right-wing media, and the like.

[Bob from Ohio]

Calling his mother a whore is very middle school. Congrats.

[Sarcastr0]

Difference between you and me - I like to mock blinded ideologues, not too-cool-for-school irony poisoned partisans.

But! To each there own, that's why the block button is a personal service.

[Frank Drackman]

So you like to mock the blind? No wonder nobody showed up for your Block party. Blocking's bad, its what they make Ex-lax for, gotta get that (redacted) out.
Oh, and Queenie's gonna call you a Mongoloid for confusing "Their" and "There", sure you aren't a Lefty in a North-Paw's body??.

Frank