boutons_deux
05-24-2016, 06:53 AM
Justice Thomas Doesn’t See Anything Wrong With Excluding Jurors Based On Race
even with all of this evidence and more at his fingertips, Justice Clarence Thomas said that the Court should not rule that unconstitutional jury discrimination took place in this case.
All seven other members of the Court agreed that Foster’s constitutional rights were violated
In his dissenting opinion, Justice Thomas appears astounded that his colleagues could care that new evidence shows that Foster’s constitutional rights were violated. “The notion that this ‘newly discovered evidence’ could warrant relitigation of a Batson claim is flabbergasting,” Thomas writes. “Time and again,” he adds, “we have said that the credibility of the attorney is best judged by the trial court and can be overturned only if it is clearly erroneous.”
Whatever the wisdom of that rule in ordinary cases, however, this is not an ordinary case. The trial judge in this case could not possibly have known what was in the records obtained by Foster’s legal team many years later. And yet, Thomas calls for extraordinary deference to that judge even after it becomes obvious that the judge was acting off of imperfect information.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/05/23/3780988/justice-thomas-give-prosecutors-permission-slip-race-discrimination/
Thomas epitomizes the garbage Repugs shit into the judiciary.
even with all of this evidence and more at his fingertips, Justice Clarence Thomas said that the Court should not rule that unconstitutional jury discrimination took place in this case.
All seven other members of the Court agreed that Foster’s constitutional rights were violated
In his dissenting opinion, Justice Thomas appears astounded that his colleagues could care that new evidence shows that Foster’s constitutional rights were violated. “The notion that this ‘newly discovered evidence’ could warrant relitigation of a Batson claim is flabbergasting,” Thomas writes. “Time and again,” he adds, “we have said that the credibility of the attorney is best judged by the trial court and can be overturned only if it is clearly erroneous.”
Whatever the wisdom of that rule in ordinary cases, however, this is not an ordinary case. The trial judge in this case could not possibly have known what was in the records obtained by Foster’s legal team many years later. And yet, Thomas calls for extraordinary deference to that judge even after it becomes obvious that the judge was acting off of imperfect information.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/05/23/3780988/justice-thomas-give-prosecutors-permission-slip-race-discrimination/
Thomas epitomizes the garbage Repugs shit into the judiciary.