Dec. 20, 2013
Stereotypes Still Limit Black Women from Serving on Juries!
By Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq.
(TriceEdneyWire.com) - The United States Supreme Court once observed, “The harm from discriminatory jury selection extends beyond that inflicted on the defendant and the excluded juror to touch the entire community.”
That is why the National Congress of Black Women recently filed an amicus—friend of the court—brief urging the Court to hear a case in which African-American women were excluded from a capital murder trial because of stereotypes about them. At its January 10, 2014 conference, the Court will decide whether to hear the case—George Brett Williams v. State of California.
In 1991, six Black women entered Compton’s courthouse ready to serve on George Brett Williams’ jury. Each stated that she was willing and able to sit in judgment of Williams, who is a Black man, and to vote for the death penalty if warranted. However, the prosecutor did not believe the women. He struck the first five, offering identical reasons for each strike—reasons that had little to do with the women’s answers, but instead with their “demeanor” and the prosecutor’s “general impression” “in spite of what they said.” Later, the prosecutor explained that he kept the sixth Black woman because “I wanted a greater mix of racial diversification on this jury.”
Mr. Williams’ attorney objected to the strikes under Batson v. Kentucky, which established a test for determining whether a peremptory challenge of a prospective juror is racially biased. (Later, in J.E.B. v. Alabama, the Court extended Batson to gender discrimination.) The defense attorney asked if the strike pattern was mere “coincidence.” “No,” replied the judge. “I have to say in my other death penalty cases I have found that the black women are very reluctant to impose the death penalty; they find it very difficult no matter what it is. I have found it to be true.”
The judge didn’t explain why she denied the final two Batson motions. She said that she could “only go by” the prosecutor’s assertions because she had no recollection of either prospective juror. Then, the prosecutor asked the remaining jurors if it would “cause anybody any concern” that he was repeatedly going up to the bench after “I kick a female black.” Ultimately, Mr. Williams was convicted and sentenced to death.
The specific questions raised by Mr. Williams’ petition to the Court concern how a reviewing court should apply Batson where the trial court fails to state its reasons for denying a Batson objection.
The case presents a question vital to African-American women, who, on account of stereotypes about their race and gender, continue to be the targets of discriminatory jury selection. The same stereotypes about race and gender that were used to entirely exclude African Americans and women from juries earlier in our nation’s history worked in concert to deny five African-American women the opportunity to serve as jurors here. These stereotypes include the assumption that a Black woman will be partial to a Black defendant on account of their shared race, as well as the assumption that a Black woman’s maternal instinct will cause her to irrationally identify with a Black defendant.
Our amicus brief, filed with the Black Women Lawyers Association of Los Angeles, Inc., reminds the Court that jury service is a fundamental right of citizenship. When a qualified juror is excluded based on group stereotypes, rather than on individual characteristics, the repercussions are far reaching.
Berkeley Law’s Death Penalty Clinic represents the National Congress of Black Women on this case. Counsel of record is the clinic’s director, Elisabeth Semel. Two of her clinic students, Celia de Pentheny O’Kelly and Jesús Mosqueda, drafted the brief under Professor Semel’s supervision. NCBW has a special interest in this case because it protects our rights.
(Dr. E. Faye Williams, Esq. is National Chair of the National Congress of Black Women. 202/678-6788. www.nationalcongressbw.org)