-
August 9th, 2009UncategorizedIn McGahee v. Alabama Dep’t of Corrections, No. 07-15602 (March 4, 2009), the Court granted a writ of habeas corpus to an Alabama death row inmate, finding that Alabama violated Batson v. Kentucky by using its peremptory strikes in a discriminatory manner at his trial for 1986 murders.
The Court found that the Alabama trial court, and the Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals, failed to properly apply Batson. The record indicated that one black juror had been struck because the State "did not want to leave him individually," a remark the Court interpreted as being because of the juror’s race. In addition, all black members of the venire were struck by the State, either for cause, or by the use of peremptory challenges. "There can be no clearer ‘pattern’ than the total removal of all African-American jurors from the venire by the State." Further, the State attempted to justify striking multiple African-American jurors because of their "low intelligence." There was no support for this finding in the record. "Furthermore, the State’s claim that several African-Americans were of ‘low intelligence’ is a particularly suspicious explanation given the role that the claim of ‘low intelligence’ has played in the history of racial discrimination from juries."
The Court called the removal of all African-American jurors from the venire "astounding." The Court found that race was a basis for striking specific black members of the venire, and a Batson violation therefore occurred. -
August 7th, 2009Uncategorized
OK, we know about the dire financial picture for the state, the latest report showing that while there’s a chance the state will have money in the bank on June 30, the following year requires major cuts or new taxes.
Budget cutting is almost a black art, shrouded in acronyms and with “State General Funds” and “All Funds” columns on complicated charts.
The House Appropriations Committee and the Senate Ways and Means Committee meet separately to put together their versions of what will at some point become a single bill that both chambers will have to approve.
That work is being done this week, before the Legislature reconvenes April 29, with the hope that each chamber will have its money committee’s version of how to make the books balance for the upcoming fiscal year—2010, which starts July 1 and ends June 30, 2010.
This behind-the-scenes work involves scouting how either to cut $328 million from the budget which was already pared down sharply in the “mega” appropriations bill which the governor signed into law–minus some line-item vetoes—last week or to find new revenues.
And, the House and Senate, almost institutionally, have different outlooks on how to make budgets work.
That predilection changes over time, depending on the membership of each chamber.
So far this year, we’ve seen from the new House leadership and membership less angst over cutting funding for elementary and secondary school funding than funds for Regent institutions.
In the Senate, from all appearances so far, there’s less fear about cutting funding for state colleges and universities. Nobody likes to do it but the kids are nearly grown-up by the time they’re going to a college or community college and while not everyone lives in a college town, well, everyone lives in a school district.
Why dwell on education spending? Because it represents the biggest pot of money in the state budget. If you’re going to save money, you cut where the money is.
That other option? Raising revenue through taxes? Chances look very slim. There’s an easy pick-off worth a total of $75 million in payments made to counties, and that’s almost in the bag. But new taxes or suspending tax cuts lawmakers gave away in previous years? Very, very tricky. The people—and mostly businesses—with tax cuts are extremely protective of them.
This ought to be an exciting wind-up session of the Legislature.
