As the high court heads into a new term, 在认识到法官的局限性的同时,关注关键案件是很重要的.

Somil Trivedi, bt356刑法改革项目前高级律师

As the Supreme Court kicks off another term this week, bt356应该明确一点:9名黑袍律师不会结束美国的大规模监禁和系统性种族主义. Not this term, not any. That doesn’t, however, 意味着从现在到6月正在辩论和判决的刑事案件是无关紧要的. The Justices could, if they choose, 对地方官员——警察——的权力施加有意义的限制, prosecutors, 法官——并对关键的宪法保护给予更严厉的打击. 这就是为什么bt356密切关注这些案件并参与其中. They matter.

That said, we should be clear-eyed about what the justices can do, what they can’t do, and how you can fill in the gaps. 考虑到这一点,这里有三个案例值得你注意:


Thompson v. Clark (argument Oct. 12, 2021)

In 2014, 在拉里·汤普森要求出示搜查令后,纽约警察错误地闯入了他在布鲁克林的家,并将他按倒在地. 为了推卸责任,警察诬告他拒捕. When the charges were finally dropped, Thompson sued the police, arguing that his Fourth Amendment rights were violated. But New York federal judges tossed the case. 他们裁定,汤普森在起诉前必须表现出“肯定的清白迹象”.

This makes no sense. 被指控犯罪的人在被证明有罪之前被推定为无罪, 在指控被撤销之前,他们可能没有时间和资源来证明自己的清白. Instead, 撤销指控本身应该足以表明刑事诉讼已经对被告有利, and a civil rights case can begin.

  • What the justices could do: 支持无罪推定和执法问责,拒绝“实际表明无罪”的标准.
  • What they can’t do: End law enforcement abuses and cover-ups, so that the next Larry Thompson is never assaulted at all, much less falsely accused of assault himself.
  • What you can do to fill the gap: Vote for prosecutors, sheriffs, judges, and mayors who commit to changing police abuses; lobby for legislation that eliminates the myriad procedural bars 到民权诉讼,在执法部门周围建立起几乎坚不可摧的保护壳.

Frasier v. Evans (argument not yet granted)

说到警察问责的程序障碍,当然有 qualified immunity, 除非法律已经“明确确立”,否则警察和其他公职人员就可以免除违反宪法的责任.实际上,这是一个几乎不可能达到的标准. 自乔治·弗洛伊德和布雷欧娜·泰勒被谋杀以来,在种族正义起义之后,有条件豁免及其致命缺陷得到了全国的承认, but we’re still awaiting its elimination.

在这起案件中,莱维·弗雷泽记录了丹佛警察击打一名男子头部的过程. 警察随后没收了弗雷泽的平板电脑,试图删除视频. Frasier rightly sued under the First Amendment, and the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (wrongly, bt356认为,给予这些官员有条件的豁免——尽管他们接受过允许公众记录的培训.

  • What the justices could do: 确认明确确立的记录警察工作的权利,并完全取消有条件豁免. 因为有条件豁免首先是法官制定的原则, the Justices could simply eliminate qualified immunity. This would be a game-changer.
  • What they can’t do: Stop police from punching people in the face.
  • What you can do fill in the gap: 而bt356继续向法院施压要求修正有条件豁免, 你可以游说你的联邦和州立法者通过立法来摆脱它. Colorado is a good example. Since this case was filed, Colorado has taken steps to eliminate qualified immunity for state civil rights actions. 实地宣传可以创造必要的势头,推动州和地方行动者填补最高法院拒绝解决的空白.

Hemphill v. State of New York (argument Oct. 5, 2021)

Here, 布朗克斯的检察官指控一名叫尼古拉斯·莫里斯(Nicholas Morris)的男子犯有谋杀罪,此前一名男子在街头大规模斗殴中被枪杀. Morris’ case ended in a mistrial. The prosecutors, undeterred, then charged Darrell Hemphill for the same murder, arguing he was the real gunman during the fight. Unsurprisingly, Hemphill implicated Morris. 检察官随后介绍了莫里斯的陈述,与亨普希尔的说法相矛盾, but without producing Morris himself to testify in court. 法官允许莫里斯的道听途说成为证据, claiming that, without it, Hemphill’s defense would “mislead” the jury. 亨普希尔目前因谋杀而服刑25年,他辩称,宪法保障了他在法庭上直接盘问莫里斯的权利.

Hemphill is right.

  • What the justices could do: 确认第六修正案的对抗条款是铁板钉钉的, 法官也不能简单地认为辩方在某种程度上具有误导性而放弃辩护. It’s the jury’s job to decide the truth, not the judge’s.
  • What they can’t do: 有意义地削减检察官和法官规避审判权的自由裁量权, including trials themselves.
  • What you can do to fill in the gap: 请再一次投票给认真履行宪法义务的检察官和法官. 同时,请支持bt356的诉讼和立法努力 cut back on pretrial detention, eliminate coercive plea bargaining, 并采取其他措施,在被指控犯罪的人和指控他们的人之间创造公平的竞争环境.

本学期当然还有其他重要的刑法案件,包括 Shinn v. Ramirezbt356体育平台联邦法院在人身保护令申请期间收集证据的权力,以及 Wooden v. United Statesbt356体育平台哪些先前的行为会导致联邦对持有枪支的过于严厉的判决. 在移民和国家安全方面也有与刑事司法有关的案件, plus cases that have yet to be granted.

More important than the outcome of any one case, however, bt356应该学会分析最高法院,根据它能做什么和不能做什么来为陷入bt356司法系统的破碎齿轮的真正的人做什么,然后开始努力弥补差距.