SPRING 2011 SYMPOSIUM - BEYOND RACIAL BLINDSIGHT
April 7 - 8, 2011
The North Carolina Racial Justice Act of 2009 (RJA) broke new ground in its recognition of the role that social science research can play in identifying racial discrimination in the criminal justice system.
The RJA expressly authorizes a claimant to rely on statistical evidence of race of defendant discrimination, race of victim discrimination, or racial discrimination in jury selection. This directly confronts the legacy of McCleskey v. Kemp (1987), which foreclosed the possibility of meaningful analysis of the role of race in death penalty systems by denying claimants the possibility of bringing claims based on social science research. McCleskey left defendants in search of the ever-elusive smoking gun.
Perhaps a claim under Batson v. Kentucky (1986) of the racially motivated exercise of a peremptory strike found somewhat more room for analytical evidence. Batson, however, confines a court's inquiry to a few isolated decision points in a particular trial and makes it difficult for a defendant to show that race, as opposed to other factors, motivated a particular decision. The RJA again endorses the value of social science evidence by allowing analysis of trends that emerge across the state or in geographic subsets in support of jury selection claims.
By allowing capital defendants to assert race discrimination through statistical evidence encompassing more than a single defendant's case, the North Carolina legislature demonstrated a willingness to move beyond the McCleskey straightjacket when addressing claims of race discrimination. This symposium addresses not only the implication of such a remarkable shift for the death penalty in North Carolina, but also the possibility that the RJA heralds a new openness to the use of social science research to inform questions obscured through exclusive reliance on direct evidence.
The exact contours of the symposium are still taking shape. We are delighted to have confirmed participation from a number of scholars already, including David Baldus, Jeffrey Fagan, Sam Gross, and Michael Radelet.
For commentary involving the premise of our syposium please consider viewing the following blog entries:
MSU Law Symposium Page http://www.law.msu.edu/blindsight/index.html
Prawf Blog http://prawfsblawg.blogs.com/prawfsblawg/2011/03/racial-blindsight-conference-at-michigan-state.html
Sentencing Law and Policy Blog http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2011/02/upcoming-msu-symposium-to-examine-nc-racial-justice-act.html
USLaw.com http://www.uslaw.com/library/Criminal_Law/Upcoming_MSU_symposium_examine_North_Carolina_Racial_Justice_Act.php?item=998584
Forbes.com http://billionaires.forbes.com/article/0doZfqi60mgnK?q=North+Carolina
Law Symposium Videos
Michigan State University College of Law
April 7-8, 2011
Moving Beyond "Racial Blindsight"? The Influence of Social Science Evidence after the North Carolina Racial Justice Act.
Thursday, April 7, 2011
3:00 PM
Symposium Welcome
3:15 - 4:45 PM
Panel 1
Katherine Barnes, Methodology & Advocacy: What is Best and What Works
Michael Radelet, Overriding Jury Sentencing Recommendations in Florida Capital Cases:An Update and Possible Half-Requiem
Sam Sommers, The Obstacles to and Consequences of Empanelling Diverse Juries
5:00 - 6:15PM
Keynote Address
Amy Bach, Ordinary Injustice: The Case Studies Behind the Justice Index
6:30 PM
Dinner
FRIDAY, APRIL 8, 2011
8:00 AM
Breakfast
8:30 - 10:15 AM
Panel 2
Deborah Denno, Genetics and the Death Penalty
Steve Dow, Preparing Law Students for Using Statistical Evidence
Chris Edelson, Use of Social Science Evidence to Understand Plaintiff's Perspectives
Sam Gross, Innocence and the Death Penalty
Panel 3
Jennifer Eberhardt, The Ape and the Static Being: Two Views of Blacks in the Modern Era
Phoebe Ellsworth, Public Opinion on Capital Punishment: The Role of Race Discrimination
Sheri Johnson, Racial Epithets
Josephine Ross, The Consent Exception to Search and Seizure, Measuring the Reasonable Person
10:30 AM - 12:15 PM
Panel 4
David Baldus, Evidence and Legal Implications of California's post-Furman v. Georgia (1972)Capital Punishment System's Failure to Meet the Eighth Amendment's "Narrowing"
Requirements
William Bowers, Wanda Foglia, Marla Sandys,Elizabeth Vartkessian, and Christopher Kelly,The Receptivity of Courts to Empirical Evidence of How Jurors Decide Death Penalty Cases: The Capital Jury Project (CJP) as a Case Study
Merry Morash & Tia Stevens, Race, Ethnicity,and Change in Boys' Penetration into the Justice System: Probability of Arrest and Court Actions
in 1980 and 2000
Panel 5
Mona Lynch, Mapping the Racial Bias of the White Male Capital Juror: Jury Composition and the Empathetic Divide
Mary Rose, Proving Jury Underrepresentation: The Many Surprising Obstacles to an Empirically-Informed Jury System
SpearIt, Enslaved by Words
12:15 - 1:45 PM
Lunch
Jack Boger, The Back Story to the North Carolina Racial Justice Act (unconfirmed)
2:00 - 3:30 PM
Panel 6
Jennifer Adger, Determining Who Dies: Exploring County-Level Variations in Capital Sentencing in Alabama
Emily Hughes, Capital Mitigation Specialists: Examining Their Importance Through A Social Science Lens
Jody Madeira, The Black, White, and Grey of Family Relations: The Impact of Constructions of Love, Family, and Deviance Influence Upon Capital Cases
Valerie West, The County Next Door: Race and Capital Sentencing in The United States
3:45 - 5:15 PM
Panel 7
Barbara O'Brien & Catherine M. Grosso, Ready to Listen: The North Carolina General Assembly's Decision to Go Where the McCleskey Court Wouldn't
Glen Pierce & Michael Radelet, Race and Death Sentencing in North Carolina, 1980-2007
Isaac Unah & Jack Boger, Race and the Death Penalty in North Carolina: An Empirical Analysis,1993-1997
6:30 PM
Dinner