Wikipedia.org political website: on Crime

Andrew Gillum: Restorative justice programs to reduce teen recidivism

Antonin Scalia: Statistical racial sentencing disparities are inevitable

On appeal, McCleskey alleged that the state's capital sentencing process was racially discriminatory, in violation of the 14th Amendment. Statistical analysis in the "Baldus study" indicated individuals convicted of murdering whites were 4.3 times more likely to receive the death penalty than those with black victims.

The Supreme Court dismissed evidence of general disparities in sentencing, such as the Baldus study, as "an inevitable part of our criminal justice system." (Majority opinion by Powell; joined by Rehnquist, White, O'Connor, Scalia). The dissent found that even if capital punishment were constitutional, this could hardly be so where it was demonstrably biased against members of a particular race. (Dissent opinion by Brennan, joined by Marshall. Blackmun, Stevens)

David Koch: Fight systemic overcriminalization and overincarceration

The Kochs stepped up their work on the issue in 2015, partnering with left-leaning groups to promote reforms to reduce incarceration in the United States.

The Kochs, along with their partners, seek to aid those suffering from systemic overcriminalization and overincarceration, who are generally from low-income and minority communities. Another goal for the Kochs' criminal justice reforms is to reduce recidivism and diminish barriers faced by rehabilitated citizens seeking reintroduction into the work force and society.

David Koch: End asset forfeiture by law enforcement

The Kochs and the ACLU invested in putting an end to Asset forfeiture by law enforcement, which deprives persons of often the bulk of their private property.

In July 2015, after the rare show of bipartisanship, President Obama praised the Kochs' work on the issue. Although critics have called the announcement a public relations stunt on behalf of the Kochs in the midst of media attacks, several media outlets noted that Charles Koch had been making substantial donations for criminal justice reform for a decade before the news was made public.

David Koch: Require criminal intent for prosecuting white-collar crimes

The Justice Department noted that some white-collar crimes, including food safety violations and corporate pollution, would become more difficult to prosecute. However, the Justice Department has been accused of over-criminalizing persons who have committed minor infractions without intent or even knowledge of the law.

In essence, the reforms could potentially overturn Ignorantia juris non excusat statutes.["Ignorantia juris non excusat" is Latin for "ignorance of the law is no excuse," i.e. that the state must prove that criminal knew it was a criminal act. White-collar prosecution would be harder because the Justice Department would have to prove knowledge of the law as well as proving a criminal act].

Harry Blackmun: Statistical racial sentencing disparities unconstitutional

On appeal, McCleskey alleged that the state's capital sentencing process was racially discriminatory, in violation of the 14th Amendment. Statistical analysis in the "Baldus study" indicated individuals convicted of murdering whites were 4.3 times more likely to receive the death penalty than those with black victims.

The Supreme Court dismissed evidence of general disparities in sentencing, such as the Baldus study, as "an inevitable part of our criminal justice system." (Majority opinion by Powell; joined by Rehnquist, White, O'Connor, Scalia). The dissent found that even if capital punishment were constitutional, this could hardly be so where it was demonstrably biased against members of a particular race. (Dissent opinion by Brennan, joined by Marshall. Blackmun, Stevens)

Harry Blackmun: Black defendants have Constitutional right to blacks on jury

The Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in Batson's favor. The court ruled that the defendant first must show that he is a member of a recognizable racial group, and that the prosecutor has removed from the jury pool members of the defendant's race, [and that Batson met those criteria]. (Majority opinion written by Powell, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor.)

The dissenting opinion concluded that the majority misapplied equal protection doctrine. (Dissent by Rehnquist, joined by Burger)

John Paul Stevens: Statistical racial sentencing disparities unconstitutional

On appeal, McCleskey alleged that the state's capital sentencing process was racially discriminatory, in violation of the 14th Amendment. Statistical analysis in the "Baldus study" indicated individuals convicted of murdering whites were 4.3 times more likely to receive the death penalty than those with black victims.

The Supreme Court dismissed evidence of general disparities in sentencing, such as the Baldus study, as "an inevitable part of our criminal justice system." (Majority opinion by Powell; joined by Rehnquist, White, O'Connor, Scalia). The dissent found that even if capital punishment were constitutional, this could hardly be so where it was demonstrably biased against members of a particular race. (Dissent opinion by Brennan, joined by Marshall. Blackmun, Stevens)

John Paul Stevens: Black defendants have Constitutional right to blacks on jury

The Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in Batson's favor. The court ruled that the defendant first must show that he is a member of a recognizable racial group, and that the prosecutor has removed from the jury pool members of the defendant's race, [and that Batson met those criteria]. (Majority opinion written by Powell, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor.)

The dissenting opinion concluded that the majority misapplied equal protection doctrine. (Dissent by Rehnquist, joined by Burger)

Kathleen Sebelius: Opponent of capital punishment during Supreme Court ruling

Mike Gravel: Citizen Power includes abolition of the death penalty

Sandra Day O`Connor: Statistical racial sentencing disparities are inevitable

On appeal, McCleskey alleged that the state's capital sentencing process was racially discriminatory, in violation of the 14th Amendment. Statistical analysis in the "Baldus study" indicated individuals convicted of murdering whites were 4.3 times more likely to receive the death penalty than those with black victims.

The Supreme Court dismissed evidence of general disparities in sentencing, such as the Baldus study, as "an inevitable part of our criminal justice system." (Majority opinion by Powell; joined by Rehnquist, White, O'Connor, Scalia). The dissent found that even if capital punishment were constitutional, this could hardly be so where it was demonstrably biased against members of a particular race. (Dissent opinion by Brennan, joined by Marshall. Blackmun, Stevens)

Sandra Day O`Connor: Black defendants have Constitutional right to blacks on jury

The Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in Batson's favor. The court ruled that the defendant first must show that he is a member of a recognizable racial group, and that the prosecutor has removed from the jury pool members of the defendant's race, [and that Batson met those criteria]. (Majority opinion written by Powell, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor.)

The dissenting opinion concluded that the majority misapplied equal protection doctrine. (Dissent by Rehnquist, joined by Burger)

William Rehnquist: Statistical racial sentencing disparities are inevitable

On appeal, McCleskey alleged that the state's capital sentencing process was racially discriminatory, in violation of the 14th Amendment. Statistical analysis in the "Baldus study" indicated individuals convicted of murdering whites were 4.3 times more likely to receive the death penalty than those with black victims.

The Supreme Court dismissed evidence of general disparities in sentencing, such as the Baldus study, as "an inevitable part of our criminal justice system." (Majority opinion by Powell; joined by Rehnquist, White, O'Connor, Scalia). The dissent found that even if capital punishment were constitutional, this could hardly be so where it was demonstrably biased against members of a particular race. (Dissent opinion by Brennan, joined by Marshall. Blackmun, Stevens)

William Rehnquist: Black defendants have no right to blacks on jury

The Supreme Court ruled in a 7-2 decision in Batson's favor. The court ruled that the defendant first must show that he is a member of a recognizable racial group, and that the prosecutor has removed from the jury pool members of the defendant's race, [and that Batson met those criteria]. (Majority opinion written by Powell, joined by Brennan, White, Marshall, Blackmun, Stevens, O'Connor.)

The dissenting opinion concluded that the majority misapplied equal protection doctrine. (Dissent by Rehnquist, joined by Burger)