U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Lemuel Carter, Jr. v. Michael Kemna Jeremiah (Jay) W. Nixon, Missouri Attorney General
This writing
- Type
- Dissent
- Author
- Richard Sheppard Arnold
- Filed
- July 3, 2001
- Case
- Lemuel Carter, Jr. v. Michael Kemna Jeremiah (Jay) W. Nixon, Missouri Attorney General
- Case status
- Decided
Opening text
The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.
RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Circuit Judge, dissenting. I would affirm. We have to assume for present purposes (and the Court' does assume) that Mr. Hurst was kept off the jury because he was black. Alternates are an important part of the trial process, and, at the time the unconstitutional strike was exercised, no one could know for sure that Mr. Hurst would not turn out to be a deliberating juror. The whole process was tainted by racial discrimination as and from that time. I believe that this is a structural error, and that interpreting Batson to allow a state to ignore it is unreasonable. Batson seeks not only to protect the rights of litigants, but also to vindicate the interests of potential jurors. It is true that the appellee cannot show that the unconstitutional discrimination had any effect on the outcome of his case. But more is at stake here than the rights of just one person. For one thing, Mr. Hurst has been deprived of an important public office because of his race. And, for another, the integrity of the judicial system itself has been compromised. The public deserves better than that, even if the appellee does not.…
Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.
Other writings in this case
| Type | Author | Filed |
|---|---|---|
| Opinion of the Court | George Gardner Fagg | July 3, 2001 |