What Justice Thomas Gets Right About Batson
Thomas Ward Frampton, Stanford Law Review & The Stanford Law Review
Citation analytics
How this journal article sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.
Courts citing this journal article
Most recently cited by1
- 2019Davis v. Guam D. Guam
Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.
Abstract
In Flowers v. Mississippi, the Supreme Court vacated the capital conviction of Curtis Flowers; prosecutor Doug Evans was “motivated in substantial part by discriminatory intent” when he used a peremptory strike to exclude a black potential juror, the Court held, violating a prohibition against such conduct first announced in Batson v. Kentucky. Justice Thomas penned a lengthy dissent that has been met with disdain in the popular press. But Justice Thomas’s dissent also gets right many things about the Batson doctrine and race in the courtroom that the Court’s liberal wing has proven loath to confront.