How Does the Media Affect Fair Trials?

 While the public deserves basic information about high-profile criminal cases, media outlets often provide extensive coverage of crimes, which can present problems for prosecutors, defendants, and defense attorneys.

The United States federal justice system relies on the principle of fair trials. Under the Sixth Amendment of the US Constitution Bill of Rights, every criminal in federal court has the right to a speedy trial with an impartial jury. While the Constitution does not define this concept, it has evolved through tradition and case law to mean that jurors do not enter the case with a preconceived bias against the defendant.

What role does media coverage play in the selection of an impartial jury? A prospective juror who has read or heard extensively about the case will likely have formed an opinion, consciously or unconsciously. The more media coverage a case has received, the more trouble attorneys may have in selecting a jury without prejudice or bias.

Attorneys for the defense and prosecution aim to weed out impartial jurors during voir dire, which is the process of selecting jurors from a larger pool. To identify and eliminate biased jurors, attorneys ask numerous questions about their ability to follow a judge’s instructions, their personal beliefs, and their exposure to pre-trial publicity.

According to research, media exposure does affect jurors’ opinions, although they are typically unaware of their biases. Capital cases attract more extensive and emotional media coverage than other cases, which makes jury selection more challenging. Media coverage also affects judges. A Stanford University study found that elected judges give harsher sentences to defendants in cases that receive significant media coverage compared to similar cases with less coverage.

Along with an impartial jury, defendants have a right to due process of law, which outlines a formal procedure of investigation and trial. This broad right extends to many legal issues and aims to prevent a government from unilaterally removing an individual’s rights. According to the Supreme Court, due process in criminal trials might be compromised if an action “fatally inflicts the trial.” An example is if an accused individual appears in court in prison clothing, as this can have an impact on jurors’ perception of innocence.

Media coverage can impact due process in many ways. While public interest trials have always been open to the public, this previously meant people could attend trials in person. Now, television broadcasts and Internet streaming mean that millions of people can watch a public trial in real-time.

The presence of cameras in a courtroom may influence witnesses to alter their testimony. For example, if the witness to a gang-related crime knew that other gang members could watch the testimony online, they might change their testimony for fear of retaliation. Similarly, jurors might fear public retribution for making an unpopular decision.

Supreme Court Justices have long differed in their opinions about cameras in the courtroom. Some believe it encourages transparency and accountability, while others are concerned that trials will become salacious entertainment.

The courts have several tools at their disposal to limit the influence of the media. A defense attorney can ask for a change of venue to move the trial from the jurisdiction where the crime took place, or the judge might postpone trial proceedings until publicity dies down.

Roper v. Simmons, a Recent Supreme Court Landmark Case

The United States Supreme Court was established in 1789. Over the course of more than 200 years, the Supreme Court has heard a number of landmark cases. A landmark case can be defined as a court case that is studied by legal professionals and scholars due to its historical and legal significance.

A relatively recent example of a landmark case heard by the US Supreme Court is Roper v. Simmons, which was decided in 2005. The case centered on Christopher Simmons, a 17-year-old, and younger accomplices Charles Benjamin and John Tessmer, though Tessmer dropped out of the plot prior to the events. Together, the trio made a plan to commit burglary and murder a 46-year-old woman, Shirley Nite Crook. The plan was carried out in 1993.

The subsequent trial was relatively straightforward, as there was ample evidence to render a guilty verdict, not to mention Simmons’ confession and video reenactment of the crimes. Tessmer testified against Simmons, confirming the premeditated nature of the murder. Despite Simmons’ age and lack of any prior criminal activity, the jury recommended the death penalty. Simmons attempted to set aside the conviction and sentence, in part due to his age, but the court rejected the motion. Simmons then made an appeal, and the case began to make its way through the US court system.

A major turning point in the ongoing case came in 2002, when the US Supreme Court overturned the death penalty for individuals living with intellectual disabilities in Atkins v. Virginia. Simmons used this decision to petition for post-conviction relief, and the Supreme Court of Missouri ultimately cited the Eighth Amendment, which outlaws cruel and unusual punishment, to deliver Simmons a sentence of life in prison without parole. The state disagreed with the sentencing, and the US Supreme Court agreed to hear the case.

Arguments began in 2004 and centered on the death penalty for juvenile offenders as cruel and unusual punishment as outlined by the Eighth Amendment. Arguments also drew attention to Thompson v. Oklahoma, a 1988 Supreme Court decision that prohibited the death penalty for individuals under the age of 16. However, Stanford v. Kentucky, in 1989, had upheld the use of capital punishment for 16- and 17-year-olds who had committed a capital offense.

Another focus involved the phrase “evolving standards of decency.” On the same day as the Stanford v. Kentucky ruling, in Penry v. Lynaugh, the court ruled that individuals living with intellectual disabilities could be executed, a ruling that was overturned in Atkins v. Virginia on the grounds of evolving standards of decency. These new standards led to such executions falling under the concept of cruel and unusual punishment and therefore being deemed unconstitutional. Arguments also referenced a “national consensus” that had formed against the death penalty as a form of punishment.

In a controversial 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court determined that the death penalty could no longer be used as a sentence against criminals under the age of 18. The ruling immediately reversed sentences for 72 individuals on death row who had been sentenced for crimes committed at the age of 17 or younger, including 29 individuals in Texas and 13 death row inmates in Alabama.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/Jv1O3EY
via IFTTT

The Lasting Impact of the Marshall Court

The Marshall Court is a term used to describe the United States Supreme Court between 1801 and 1835, during which time John Marshall served in the role of chief justice. He was the court’s fourth chief justice and the first justice to serve in the role for an extended period of time. A number of notable cases were heard by the Supreme Court during the Marshall years.

The Marshall Court made its first major decision in 1803 with Marbury v. Madison. Marshall authored the court’s unanimous decision, which brought an end to Section 13 of the Judiciary Act of 1789 on the grounds that it conflicted with the court’s jurisdiction as outlined by the US Constitution. The landmark case cemented the Supreme Court’s power of judicial review, as the decision superseded a law that had been written by the US Congress.

Seven years later, the court heard Fletcher v. Peck. The court’s opinion was once again written by Marshall, who maintained that the state of Georgia had been influenced by bribery in the decision to void land grants to the Yazoo nation. Similar to the Marbury v. Madison case, Fletcher v. Peck marked the first time that the Supreme Court determined that a state law was unconstitutional.

Another seven years passed before the court heard Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee. This time, the court’s opinion was authored by justice Joseph Story. Story wrote that the Supreme Court held appellate power against state courts when it came to the US Constitution and interactions with both federal laws and treaties. The Supreme Court reaffirmed this position in 1821 in Cohens v. Virginia.

In 1819, the court heard two important cases: McCulloch v. Maryland and Dartmouth College v. Woodward. In the former, the court unanimously decided that a state has no power to tax a federal bank operating within the state. In the latter decision, the court barred the state of New Hampshire from altering the college’s charter, a ruling that protected corporate contracts from state interference.

Johnson v. M’Intosh was heard by Chief Justice Marshall and the Supreme Court in 1823. The complex case involved a number of plaintiffs, mostly British subjects, who claimed property that had been sold by members of the Piankeshaw nation prior to the American Revolution. In a landmark decision, the court ruled that private citizens cannot purchase lands from Native Americans.

Gibbons v. Ogden was an influential case heard by the Supreme Court in 1824. Once again, Marshall and the court struck down a state law, this time from New York. In the decision, the court ruled that the legislation in question granted the state a monopoly on local steamship operations. In this particular instance, the court demonstrated its ability to use the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution to regulate commerce.

Additional cases heard by John Marshall include Worcester v. Georgia in 1832 and Barron v. Baltimore in 1833. In the former case, the court ruled that the state of Georgia lacked the power to govern Native American tribes. The latter was a unanimous opinion that determined that the Bill of Rights could not be applied to state governments. However, the decision was mostly overruled following the ratification of the 14th Amendment and later Supreme Court rulings.

John Marshall passed away in 1834, bringing an end to the Marshall Court. He was followed as chief justice by Roger Brooke Taney, best known for the Dred Scott decision in 1857.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/TR2cHNG
via IFTTT

The First Notable Supreme Court Decisions

The United States Supreme Court was assembled throughout 1789 and convened for the first time on February 2, 1790. Between 1789 and 1801, the Supreme Court had three chief justices: John Jay, John Rutledge, and Oliver Ellsworth. These judges presided over the earliest cases heard by the US Supreme Court.

A New York City native, John Jay was born in 1745 and served as one of the nation’s founding fathers. In addition to serving in the Continental Congress, he contributed to the Federalist Papers and served as chief justice for the state of New York. President George Washington appointed Jay as the nation’s first chief justice in 1789.

The first-ever case docketed for the US Supreme Court was Van Staphorst v. Maryland in 1791. The origins of the case involved the Van Staphorst brothers, bankers who lent the state of Maryland money over the course of the Revolutionary War. At the conclusion of the war, the state declined to pay back the loan under the terms set by the brothers. Although the case was accepted and docketed by the Supreme Court, the parties settled prior to litigation. Collet v. Collet was also docketed but dropped prior to oral arguments.

West v. Barnes also came to the Supreme Court in 1791, and would be the first case decided by the court, with John Jay as chief justice. William West of Rhode Island owed a mortgage on his farm and, after 20 years of payments, conducted a lottery and paid off the remaining debt with paper currency, as opposed to gold and silver. David L. Barnes refused the payment and demanded gold and silver, resulting in litigation.

The court ultimately rendered a decision on procedural grounds, determining that West’s appeal for lottery should have been made with the clerk of the Supreme Court of the United States, as opposed to a lower court. Following the decision, Congress amended the Process and Compensation Act of 1792 so that citizens could make such appeals with local circuit courts.

Chisholm v. Georgia is often regarded as the most controversial and impactful decision made by the Supreme Court during Jay’s tenure as chief justice. The origins of the case can be traced back to 1777, when Thomas Stone and Edward Davies purchased goods to support American troops in Savannah. Robert Farquhar, the merchant, died before payment was rendered, and his estate made a claim on the debt in 1789. Alexander Chisholm, executor of Farquhar’s estate, filed the case with a circuit court in 1791.

In a 4-1 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Chisholm. As part of the summary, Jay and the other justices stated that federal courts hold jurisdiction in cases involving a state and a citizen of another state, assuming the state is the defendant. Jay also led the court when the 11th Amendment was proposed by Congress, a direct response to the Chisholm v. Georgia ruling that dictates an individual’s capacity to litigate against a state in federal court.

In 1794, Jay stepped away from the Supreme Court to resume his duties as a diplomat, traveling to Great Britain to resolve tensions surrounding exports, seizures, and occupation. He played a driving role in the development and passing of the Jay Treaty, which many Americans protested for what they believed to be overly favorable terms for the British. However, Jay’s actions as a diplomat helped avoid embroiling the nation in a war it was not ready to fight. By the time he returned to the United States, he learned that he had been elected governor of New York, at which point he resigned his position as chief justice.

Jay was followed as chief justice by John Rutledge in 1795 and Oliver Ellsworth in 1796, though no major cases were heard during this time.

from WordPress https://ift.tt/iEekpC5
via IFTTT