Georgia v. McCollum

Jump to content

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1992 United States Supreme Court case

Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that a criminal defendant cannot make peremptory challenges based solely on race.[1] The court had previously held in _Batson v. Kentucky _ (1986) that prosecutors cannot make peremptory challenges based on race, but did not address whether defendants could use them.[2] The court had already ruled in _Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company _ (1991) that the Batson prohibition also applies to civil litigants because they are state actors during the jury selection process.[3]

However, in Polk County v. Dodson,[4] the court had held that a public defender is not a state actor in the context of a lawsuit for inadequate legal representation. McCollum argued that Polk County was the controlling precedent, so public defenders are not state actors during jury selection. Writing for the court, Justice Harry Blackmun disagreed. Blackmun found that whether a public defender is a state actor "depends on the nature and context of the function he is performing."[5] Just as he is a state actor in the context of personnel decisions like hiring and firing attorneys in his office, a public defender is a state actor in the context of peremptory challenges. Like in Edmonson, Blackmun found that race-based peremptory challenges by the defendant violate the Equal Protection Clause and are therefore unconstitutional.

McCollum was the first case in which the Supreme Court referred to Black people with the term "African American" rather than the term "Negro."[6]

References

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georgia_v._McCollum&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: References")
]

1. ↑ Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992).
2. ↑ _Batson v. Kentucky _, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
3. ↑ _Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co. _, 500 U.S. 614 (1991).
4. ↑ Polk County v. Dodson, 454 U.S. 312 (1981).
5. ↑ McCollum, 505 U.S. at 54.
6. ↑ "The Emergence of the Term "African American" at Two Prestigious Institutions: The New York Times and the Supreme Court" . The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (16): 12–15. 1997. doi :10.2307/2962878 . ISSN  1077-3711 .

Further reading

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georgia_v._McCollum&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: Further reading")
]

• Middleton, Matthew J. (1992). "The Impact of Georgia v. McCollum: Is This the End of Race-Based Peremptory Challenges". Howard Scroll: The Social Justice Law Review. 1: 76. ISSN  1070-3713 .
• Vernon, Eric E. (1993). "Georgia v. McCollum: An Unprincipled and Potentially Unjust Ending to the Peremptory Challenge Cases" (PDF). BYU Law Review. 1993: 1019. ISSN  0896-2383 . Archived from the original (PDF) on September 8, 2006. Retrieved June 24, 2008.

External links

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georgia_v._McCollum&action=edit&section=3 "Edit section: External links")
]

• Text of Georgia v. McCollum, 505 U.S. 42 (1992) is available from: CourtListener Google Scholar Internet Archive (docket files) Justia Library of Congress Oyez (oral argument audio)

United States equal protection and criminal procedure case law

Discrimination in jury selection

• *Glasser interpreted the Impartial Jury Clause of the Sixth Amendment. **Thiel and Edmonson were civil cases.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Georgia_v._McCollum&oldid=1351346069 "

Categories :

• United States Supreme Court cases

• United States Supreme Court cases of the Rehnquist Court

• Batson challenge case law

• United States Supreme Court cases in 1992

• United States racial discrimination case law

• Criminal cases in the Rehnquist Court

Hidden categories:

• Use American English from September 2025

• All Wikipedia articles written in American English

• Use mdy dates from September 2023

• Articles with short description

• Short description matches Wikidata

Search

Search

Georgia v. McCollum

Add languages Add topic