Course Hero Logo

Likely to receive the death penalty than are white

Course Hero uses AI to attempt to automatically extract content from documents to surface to you and others so you can study better, e.g., in search results, to enrich docs, and more. This preview shows page 68 - 69 out of 87 pages.

likely to receive the death penalty than are white defendants in a state will NOT in itself establish that aparticular black defendant was denied equal protection by being sentenced to death for murder in that state.The statistical study is insufficient to prove purposeful discrimination because black defendants had toshow that in theirparticular casethere is discrimination, so McCleskey needs to prove this happened inhis exact caseCity of Mobile v. Bolden (1980):The Supreme Court has extended the requirement for a discriminatory purposeto include the Fifteenth Amendment and its prohibition of race-based interference with the right to vote.Facts:Wiley L. Bolden and other residents of Mobile, Alabama brought a class action on behalf of allblack citizens in Mobile. They argued that the practice of electing the City Commissioners at-largeunfairly diluted the voting strength of black citizens.oAt large voting:need a majority of the votes, so minorities of the population get no sayHolding:An at-large system does NOT violate the 15th amend. because only purposefullydiscriminatory denials of the freedom to vote on the basis of race demanded constitutional remedies.oCourt held that facially neutral actions were unconstitutional only if motivated by discriminatorypurposesCompare toRogers v. Lodge (1982):Court found that an at-large election system wasunconstitutional because there was sufficient proof of a discriminatory purpose behind the electionsystemoHere, the people proved that the change in the election system was for a discriminatory reasonPersonnel Administrator of MA v. Feeney (1979):Facts:Mass. Statute granting a hiring preference to veterans even though the result would disadvantage womensince most veterans are men (98%).Holding:UPHELD the law becausethe purpose of the statute was to help veterans, not to discriminateagainst women.Justice Stewart:Discriminatory purpose,” however, implies more than intent as volition or intent as awareness ofconsequences. It implies that the decisionmaker, in this case a state legislature, selected or reaffirmed a particularcourse of action at least in part “because of,” not merely “in spite of,” its adverse effects upon an identifiablegroupMust have passed the law “because of” not “in spite of”Reasoning:When a law is challenged on the grounds that it affects woman adversely, a two-part inquiry must beengaged in whereas:o(1) is the classification gender based?;o(2) if not, does the adverse effect reflect invidious gender discrimination?As inArlington Heights, impact provides an important staring point. However, only purposeful discriminationoffends the constitution.oDiscriminatory purpose under the equal protection clause requires more than awareness of negativeconsequences on a protected group.

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

End of preview. Want to read all 87 pages?

Upload your study docs or become a

Course Hero member to access this document

Term
Spring
Professor
Eric Freedman
Tags
First Amendment to the United States Constitution

Newly uploaded documents

Show More

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture