Ham v. South Carolina

1973-01-17

Headline: Court reverses conviction and requires judges to ask jurors about racial bias when requested, helping minority defendants challenge potentially biased jurors while other bias questions remain up to judge discretion.

Holding: The Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment required the trial judge to ask prospective jurors about racial prejudice when defense counsel timely requested it, and reversed the conviction for the judge's failure to do so.

Real World Impact:

Allows defendants to request juror questions about racial bias during jury selection.
Requires judges to examine jurors on racial prejudice when timely asked.
Leaves other bias questions and question phrasing to trial judges' discretion.

Topics: jury selection, racial bias, criminal defense, pretrial publicity

Summary

Background

A young, bearded Black man active in local civil rights work was tried in South Carolina for marijuana possession. He said police targeted and framed him. Before trial his lawyer asked the judge to put four questions to prospective jurors about racial prejudice, prejudice against beards, and recent local publicity about drugs; the judge refused and instead asked only three general statutory questions about bias.

Reasoning

The Court considered whether the judge’s refusal to ask about racial prejudice violated the defendant’s rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. Relying on earlier decisions and the Amendment’s purpose to prevent racial discrimination, the Court held that the judge was required to interrogate jurors about racial bias when defense counsel timely requested it. The Court emphasized that judges retain broad discretion on the exact wording and number of questions. The majority declined to decide the publicity question because the record did not include the articles or program, and it held that asking about prejudice against beards was not constitutionally required under these facts.

Real world impact

The decision means trial judges must allow targeted questions about racial prejudice when a timely request is made, giving accused people a clearer path to expose race-based bias in jury selection. At the same time, judges keep discretion over phrasing and whether to permit questioning about other kinds of prejudice; lacking evidence, the Court did not rule on publicity-based bias.

Dissents or concurrances

Justices Douglas and Marshall agreed race questions were required but argued the judge abused discretion by barring questions about beard prejudice and other reasonable inquiries, urging broader voir dire rights.