Appellant
Taylor Strauder
Appellee
State of West Virginia
Appellant's Claim
That a West Virginia statute allowing only whites to serve on juries prevented Strauder from enjoying due process and full protection under the law.
Chief Lawyers for Appellant
George O. Davenport; Charles Devens, U.S. Attorney General
Chief Lawyers for Appellee
Robert White; J. W. Green
Justices for the Court
Joseph P. Bradley, John Marshall Harlan I, Ward Hunt, Samuel Freeman Miller,William Strong (writing for the Court), Noah Haynes Swayne, Morrison Remick Waite
Justices Dissenting
Nathan Clifford, Stephen Johnson Field
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
1 March 1880
Decision
In favor of Strauder, the appellant.
Significance
The Strauder decision established the right of African Americans to beseated as jurors.
"A Brand Upon Them"
In its decision handed down on 1 March 1880, the Court agreed with Strauder that the state's jury system was discriminatory. Writing for the majority, Justice Strong wondered how West Virginia could not be considered to discriminate against a "colored" defendant on trial for his life when all other AfricanAmericans were expressly prevented from serving as jurors on the basis of race alone. The Court ruled that exclusion from juries on the basis of race violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifically forbid states from withholding equal protection under the law:
Despite a dissent by Justices Clifford and Field, the Court ordered the WestVirginia court decision reversed and the case remitted. Field and Clifford cited the position they had taken in Ex Parte Virginia, a similar case in 1879 involving the racial composition of juries. The two justices felt thatthe Fourteenth Amendment stopped short of implying that all persons should be allowed to participate in the administration of state laws or hold public office. Field wrote that the Court should restrict itself to ruling on the correctness of verdicts meted out by state courts and order new trials only if errors were found.
Related Cases
African Americans and the Jury System
Although many people perceive a summons to jury duty as a burden, the opportunity to serve on a jury is in fact a right. As such, it was denied to many African Americans until 1968.
The Supreme Court had ruled as early as 1808, in United States v. Mullany, that African Americans could act as competent witnesses in court, but most jurisdictions (particularly in the South) either flatly denied African Americans the right to testify, or subjected the testimony of a black person toextraordinary suspicion and scrutiny. The right to serve as a juror was closely tied with that of acting as a witness, and states found loopholes for withholding both of these civil rights from African Americans despite court rulings that deemed unconstitutional any systematic efforts at eliminating blacksfrom juries.
Provisions for enforcement came only with the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, whose victories included the passage by Congress of the Jury Selection and Service Act. The act, passed in 1968, established specific provisions forinclusion of all citizens in the jury pool, and the Court's decision in Duncan v. Louisiana that year extended Sixth Amendment jury-trial provisions to the states.
Sources
Bradley, David, and Shelley Fisher Fishkin, eds. The Encyclopedia of CivilRights in America. Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 1998.
Taylor Strauder
Appellee
State of West Virginia
Appellant's Claim
That a West Virginia statute allowing only whites to serve on juries prevented Strauder from enjoying due process and full protection under the law.
Chief Lawyers for Appellant
George O. Davenport; Charles Devens, U.S. Attorney General
Chief Lawyers for Appellee
Robert White; J. W. Green
Justices for the Court
Joseph P. Bradley, John Marshall Harlan I, Ward Hunt, Samuel Freeman Miller,William Strong (writing for the Court), Noah Haynes Swayne, Morrison Remick Waite
Justices Dissenting
Nathan Clifford, Stephen Johnson Field
Place
Washington, D.C.
Date of Decision
1 March 1880
Decision
In favor of Strauder, the appellant.
Significance
The Strauder decision established the right of African Americans to beseated as jurors.
"A Brand Upon Them"
In its decision handed down on 1 March 1880, the Court agreed with Strauder that the state's jury system was discriminatory. Writing for the majority, Justice Strong wondered how West Virginia could not be considered to discriminate against a "colored" defendant on trial for his life when all other AfricanAmericans were expressly prevented from serving as jurors on the basis of race alone. The Court ruled that exclusion from juries on the basis of race violated the Fourteenth Amendment, which specifically forbid states from withholding equal protection under the law:
The statute of West Virginia which, in effect, singles out and denies to colored citizens the right and privilege of participating in the administration of the law as jurors because oftheir color, though qualified in all other respects, is, practically, a brand upon them, and a discrimination against them which is forbidden by the amendment.
Despite a dissent by Justices Clifford and Field, the Court ordered the WestVirginia court decision reversed and the case remitted. Field and Clifford cited the position they had taken in Ex Parte Virginia, a similar case in 1879 involving the racial composition of juries. The two justices felt thatthe Fourteenth Amendment stopped short of implying that all persons should be allowed to participate in the administration of state laws or hold public office. Field wrote that the Court should restrict itself to ruling on the correctness of verdicts meted out by state courts and order new trials only if errors were found.
Related Cases
- Ex Parte Virginia, 100 U.S. 339 (1879).
- United States ex rel. Krueger v. Kinsella, 137 F.Supp. 806 (1956).
- Murphy v. Garrett, 729 F.Supp. 461 (1990).
African Americans and the Jury System
Although many people perceive a summons to jury duty as a burden, the opportunity to serve on a jury is in fact a right. As such, it was denied to many African Americans until 1968.
The Supreme Court had ruled as early as 1808, in United States v. Mullany, that African Americans could act as competent witnesses in court, but most jurisdictions (particularly in the South) either flatly denied African Americans the right to testify, or subjected the testimony of a black person toextraordinary suspicion and scrutiny. The right to serve as a juror was closely tied with that of acting as a witness, and states found loopholes for withholding both of these civil rights from African Americans despite court rulings that deemed unconstitutional any systematic efforts at eliminating blacksfrom juries.
Provisions for enforcement came only with the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, whose victories included the passage by Congress of the Jury Selection and Service Act. The act, passed in 1968, established specific provisions forinclusion of all citizens in the jury pool, and the Court's decision in Duncan v. Louisiana that year extended Sixth Amendment jury-trial provisions to the states.
Sources
Bradley, David, and Shelley Fisher Fishkin, eds. The Encyclopedia of CivilRights in America. Armonk, NY: Sharpe, 1998.
User Comments Add a comment…