Motley Moose – Archive

Since 2008 – Progress Through Politics

Eyes on the Courts




photo Court_zpsfca4d074.jpg




For as long as I can remember, the path our boots on the ground in protest have taken have led us up the steps into some courthouse.

“Eyes on the prize” becomes eyes on judges and juries.  

Whether federal, state or local, we wait to see if justice means “just-us people in power” or if the voices of the black, brown, yellow, red and rainbow segment of citizens will triumph under the rule of law.


Many of us, around the nation have turned our eyes to a courthouse in Florida, where the trial of George Zimmerman has opened.  

For us, the murder of Trayvon Martin has become this decades trial of the racist murderers of young Emmitt Till which took place in 1955.

That trial ended in acquittal

Only three outcomes were possible in Mississippi for capital murder: life imprisonment, the death penalty, or acquittal. On September 23 the jury acquitted both defendants after a 67-minute deliberation; one juror said, “If we hadn’t stopped to drink pop, it wouldn’t have taken that long.”

Bob Dylan immortalized the failure of justice in song:

And then to stop the United States of yelling for a trial

Two brothers they confessed that they had killed poor Emmett Till

But on the jury there were men who helped the brothers commit this

awful crime

And so this trial was a mockery, but nobody seemed to mind

I saw the morning papers but I could not bear to see

The smiling brothers walkin’ down the courthouse stairs

For the jury found them innocent and the brothers they went free

While Emmett’s body floats the foam of a Jim Crow southern sea

If you can’t speak out against this kind of thing, a crime that’s so unjust

Your eyes are filled with dead men’s dirt, your mind is filled with dust

Your arms and legs they must be in shackles and chains, and your blood

it must refuse to flow

For you let this human race fall down so God-awful low!

That all-white jury was par for the course in our past.

Jury selection has begun in Florida. We will be watching closely to see the composition of the panel.

Meanwhile, up north in New York City, we wait for Federal Judge Judge Shira Scheindlin to hand down a decision in Floyd, et al. v. City of New York, et al, which we refer to as the “Stop and Frisk” trial.

The Center for Constitutional Rights has a full summary.

The eyes and ears of the nation will also soon be turned to the Supremes.  

The Roberts Court will be ruling on affirmative action (Fisher v. University of Texas), the the Voting Rights Act (Shelby County v. Holder), and marriage equality (Hollingsworth v. Perry and United States v. Windsor).

These, and other crucial judicial decisions; past, present and future, should serve to remind us yet again, to keep our eyes on the prize.  



Do not forget that elections have judicial consequences.

No matter how hard we protest in the streets, we wind up walking up courthouse steps.

Let us not forget who appoints judges.

The right wing knows this as well as we do. Hence the increasing restrictions on our right to vote.

Do not be distracted.  

Keep your eyes on the prize.


Cross-posted from Black Kos  


Categories: General.

/ 36 Comments

36 comments

  1. DeniseVelez

    predictions about the outcomes. I hope any lawyers here who have a better understanding than I do of the SCOTUS cases will weigh in.

  2. HappyinVT

    Till’s murderers, sadly.

    I’m not a lawyer and I have nothing but my gut but I think at least two do not go our way.  Have a better feeling about marriage equality but not by much.

  4. JanF

    I am anxiously awaiting the ruling on the Voters Right Act.

    I expect affirmative action to finally succumb to the relentless attacks it has received since it was first put in place. I suspect that the reason the Roberts Court took just-one-more affirmative action case was to gleefully put the last nail in its coffin.    

  5. JanF

    How Race Can Influence Jury Selection In The George Zimmerman Murder Trial


    If Zimmerman can pack the jury with “white, conservative, pro-conviction jurors,” he increases his odds of winning on a claim of self-defense, defense lawyer Jose Baez told several news outlets.

    … while race may be particularly relevant during this trial, it can play only a very limited role during jury selection. Although potential jurors’ views about race, racism, or related questions may be considered and are particularly important as the lawyers seek to root out bias, any attempt by the lawyers – veiled or otherwise – to eliminate jurors based on their racial identity, is unlawful and can be cause for a challenge to jury selection.

    The relevant SCOTUS case for raising the question of discrimination is Batson v. Kentucky (No. 84-6263) and according to the ThinkProgress article, Florida has even stronger rules in place:

    In Florida, state law actually imposes a slightly higher burden than even the federal standard, by requiring the judge to consider whether the race-neutral reason for rejecting a juror was “genuine” via several factors, such as whether other jurors gave similar answers during questioning but were not struck.

  7. JanF

    This from NY Times


    BREAKING NEWS Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:51 AM EDT

    Supreme Court Rules Human Genes May Not Be Patented

    Human genes may not be patented, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday. The case concerned patents held by Myriad Genetics, a Utah company, on genes that correlate with increased risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The central question for the justices in the case was whether isolated genes are “products of nature” that may not be patented or “human-made inventions” eligible for patent protection.

Comments are closed.