State v. Bailey (2007)

From Judgepedia

• The majority opinion of the Court concluded that a white district attorney should have recused himself from the prosecution of "The Jena 6," six African-American high school students who attacked a white student, because his past behavior indicated a bias towards vigorous prosecution of blacks, and insufficient prosecution of whites.

ISSUES:

The issue before the Court was whether LaSalle Parish District Attorney J. Reed Walters abused his prosecutorial authority by taking race into account when exercising his charging authority

HOLDING:

The Court held that the District Attorney should have recused himself.

REASONING:

• (1) "In a public statement, the District Attorney stated his intent to charge ["the Jena 6," six teenage african-american boys] with the harshest crimes, and to seek the maximum penalty allowed by law, while characteriing efforts to indimdate African-Americans as a 'prank' and bringing only misdemeanor charges against the whites who assaulted Bailey."

• (2) The District Attorney had a conflict of interest because he was an advisor to the LaSalle Parish School Board, and his involvement in the decision to expel Bailey.

• (3) "Our Justice system has failed if citizens can not expect equal protection of the law and equal application of the law."

POTENTIAL FLAWS IN THE COURT'S REASONING:

For a discussion of potential flaws in the court's reasoning, see this link to the discussion page, or click on the discussion tab at the top of this page.