Louisiana trials. But we need to place this into perspective. This laudable ruling would only apply to cases then pending or recent will i adjudicated. It meant nothing to mr mr. Edwards, the only place that would jail you for life on a nonunanimous verdict. Why should the 6th amendment mean something less to mr. Edwards. Members of the ramos court were divided how to reconcile the fractured decision with then existing precedent. This cleared two paths that ramos, two paths to remedy those jailed by a jury scheme we know was morally wrong at its i think so tension and is unconstitutional. For some, apdoca was dead on arrival. And with these, they provided no value and ramos is an old rule dictated by precedent that simply restored the 6th amendments full measure either through the due process clause or privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment. For other justices. Apadoca was such a wrong decision, it needed to be overruled. And this restores fairness to jury trials in loui
Distance and fall other guidelines and regulations so thank you for your patience and following those. We have here today judge jeff sutton, he flew in last night, right through the storm, and so were grateful his flight made it here safely and were able to have this event today. Judge sutton is a judge of the u. S. Court of appeals for the six inch circuit where the served since 2003. Nominated by george w. Bush. He is a former solicitor general of ohio, hes been in private practice, has clerked for several judges, including justice ask Justice Scalia, the subject of his new book. The title of the occasion today is essentialal scalia. Were all about scalia in this chapter. Judge sutton revved hi ba from William College and law degree from the ohio state university. Chair of the federal Judicial Conference Committee on the rules of practice and procedure, appointed to that position by chief justice john roberts. He has taught constitutional law and other legal sums at a number of unive
Louisianas nonunanimous jury. On paper with a full breath of the jury trial right but the ruling needs to be put into perspective this ruling the ending or adjudicated it meant nothing to serving a life sentence for work that would be illegal everywhere else but louisianas only place that would you for life on a nonunanimous verdict. The question before the court is why should the fifth amendment mean something less us members of the court were divided on how to reconcile the fracture decision this had clear as to have a remedy for those of the jury scheme that was morally wrong at its inception and unconstitutional. They havent no president ial value this is an old rule and an accident for the six amendment full measure with the due process clause or the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment. With such a long a decision to be explicitly for those members of the court should be a watershed and restores for fairness and accuracy to the jury trials in louisiana. And those
The honorable, the chief justice and the associate justices of the Supreme Court of the United States. Oh yea oh yea oh yea, all persons having business before the honorable, the Supreme Court of the United States to give their attention with the court is sitting, god save the United States and this honorable court. We will hear arguments first this morning in 19 for 65, the lot below and the others versus the state of washington,. Mr. Chief justice and appease this court, the question in these cases is straightforward to the states have the power to control through law how an elector may vote, they do not, then ordinary expected meaning of the words of the constitution against the backlog of the framers deliberation make it clear that the state has no such power in what is also clear, washington is not like the constitution design, ask this court to read the words elector as agents or maybe better minion and it is clear that the board vote elector is not the constant meaning there vot
Louisianas nonunanimous jury. On paper with a full breath of the jury trial right but the ruling needs to be put into perspective this ruling the ending or adjudicated it meant nothing to serving a life sentence for work that would be illegal everywhere else but louisianas only place that would you for life on a nonunanimous verdict. The question before the court is why should the fifth amendment mean something less us members of the court were divided on how to reconcile the fracture decision this had clear as to have a remedy for those of the jury scheme that was morally wrong at its inception and unconstitutional. They havent no president ial value this is an old rule and an accident for the six amendment full measure with the due process clause or the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th amendment. With such a long a decision to be explicitly for those members of the court should be a watershed and restores for fairness and accuracy to the jury trials in louisiana. And those