Supreme Court 2020s: on Crime
Ketanji Brown Jackson:
Prisons must evaluate and accommodate deaf prisoners
In Pierce v. District of Columbia, Judge Jackson considered disability discrimination and retaliation claims brought by a deaf man who was incarcerated in the D.C. Correctional Treatment Facility without accommodations such as access to an American Sign
Language interpreter. Judge Jackson ruled in favor of the plaintiff on his discrimination claims, finding dispositive the fact that prison staff "did nothing to evaluate [the plaintiff's] need for accommodation, despite their knowledge that he was
disabled." Rejecting as "preposterous" the government's claim that the plaintiff had not requested accommodations for his disability, she held that "the failure of prison staff to conduct an informed assessment of the abilities and
accommodation needs of a new inmate who is obviously disabled is intentional discrimination in the form of deliberate indifference as a matter of law."
Source: Cong. Research Service on 2022 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearings
Mar 14, 2022
Ketanji Brown Jackson:
Miranda warning not required outside of police interrogation
In a case addressing Fifth Amendment protections, United States v. Richardson, Judge Jackson denied a motion to suppress statements that the defendant claimed were the product of custodial interrogation by law enforcement without constitutionally
required Miranda warnings.The defendant was detained in the living room of the apartment while law enforcement officers searched the apartment for drugs and guns. An officer discovered a handgun hidden in a laundry basket, and the defendant made
several statements that the handgun was hers.
Judge Jackson ultimately concluded that Miranda warnings were not required because the defendant "was not being subjected to police interrogation at the time she made the statements," based on testimony
indicating the defendant volunteered the statements in an atmosphere that was neither "inherently coercive" nor designed "to elicit an incriminating response" from her.
Source: Cong. Research Service on 2022 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearings
Mar 14, 2022
Ketanji Brown Jackson:
No expectation of privacy when not in your apartment
In United States v. Leake, Judge Jackson denied the suppression motion of a defendant who claimed that officers violated his Fourth Amendment rights when they entered his apartment building's laundry room, arrested him without sufficient cause, and used
excessive force. Judge Jackson concluded that the defendant lacked standing to challenge the officers' entry to the apartment building's laundry room because it was a space in which he lacked a common law property-interest, the right to exclude
individuals, or a reasonable expectation of privacy. Jackson also determined that when one of the officers grabbed the defendant's arm, it amounted to an investigatory stop justified by reasonable suspicion of criminal activity given that the defendant
was standing in a suspicious position holding a "small clear plastic baggie in his hand."Judge Jackson also determined that the officers did not use excessive force by tackling the defendant when he tried to flee (and then fight) the officers.
Source: Cong. Research Service on 2022 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearings
Mar 14, 2022
Ketanji Brown Jackson:
Denied release of child pornographer as risk to community
In United States v. Sears Judge Jackson denied compassionate release of an inmate with medical conditions, such as diabetes mellitus and asthma, that he claimed placed him at greater risk of serious complications from COVID-19.
The Judge's opinion concluded that reduction of the inmate's sentence would not comport with statutory sentencing factors concerning the purposes of punishment, citing the "extremely serious" nature of the inmate's crime
(distribution of child pornography), his high risk of reoffending and lack of sex offender treatment while in federal custody,
and the risk to the community if he were released.
Source: Cong. Research Service on 2022 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearings
Mar 14, 2022
Ketanji Brown Jackson:
Pushed to commute uncle's sentence under "three strikes" law
The thick envelope that Ketanji Brown Jackson received in the mail in 2005, when she was a federal public defender in D.C., was like many others inmates had sent to her office: laden with stamps and stuffed with court filings and a plea for help. But
this one was a personal appeal. It had been sent by her distant uncle, Thomas Brown Jr., inmate #15854-004, who was serving a life sentence in Florida for a nonviolent drug crime.Jackson's brush with her uncle and his prison sentence, which arose out
of the nation's war on drugs, adds to a set of life experiences that would distinguish her from previous justices. Brown was sentenced to life under a "three strikes" law. After a referral from Jackson, a powerhouse law firm took his case pro bono, and
President Barack Obama years later commuted his sentence.
By the time her uncle contacted her, that person said, she was an experienced attorney and "already knew what has become a national consensus that the nation's drug laws were overly harsh."
Source: Washington Post on 2022 SCOTUS Confirmation Hearings
Jan 30, 2022
Amy Coney Barrett:
George Floyd video shows that racism persists
Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett have not ruled on affirmative action cases as appellate judges. Barrett has two adopted Black children and during her confirmation hearings, she was asked where, "as an originalist,"
she thought the country was today on race.
She answered: "I think it is an entirely uncontroversial and obvious statement given, as we just talked about, the George Floyd video, that racism persists in our country.
As to putting my finger on the nature of the problem, you know, whether it's just outright or systemic racism, or how to tackle the issue of making it better, those things, you know, are policy questions."
Source: National Law Journal on 2022 SCOTUS Affirmative Action
Jan 24, 2022
Page last updated: Mar 21, 2022