Comments | texaslawchick: Shipp Trial

texaslawchick

Shipp Trial

Oct 31, 2005 15:39

I was at a CLE last week, and one of the presentations was an hour long, uh, story, I guess is the best way to describe it, about the criminal trial in Tennessee state court, appeal in state court, writ of habeus corpus to federal court and then writ of habeus corpus to the Supreme Court in 1906 ( Read more... )

history, law

Comments 10

pecunium October 31 2005, 22:00:28 UTC

I've heard of it, you are not an idiot.

It's not well known, and I can't say why (you'd think the only criminal case the court has ever heard would get more play, even if just as a trivia question).

I suspect part of it has to do with people not wanting to see how rampant the violent racism in the country was, and how complicit the law often was.

TK

datawhorevoyeur October 31 2005, 22:18:36 UTC

It sounds vaguely familiar, but not from a legal ed. standpoint -- I possibly read about it when reading about anti-lynching activists? Or I may just be thinking of the familiar contours of the case, since it is a typical lynching narrative...

texaslawchick October 31 2005, 22:38:12 UTC

I thought of you instantly when I heard about it. I'll lend you the book when I'm done with it.

lanalucy October 31 2005, 22:41:41 UTC

I recall knowing that a single criminal case had been heard by the Supreme Court, but not the details of it. Probably just another one of those things we don't know about, because we don't want to think about any of it.

Teaching it in school would require school books to use the word "nigger." Can't have that, now. Somebody might get offended.

llnaughty October 31 2005, 22:53:29 UTC

is there any conflict of interest with scotus deciding whether this was in their own jurisdiction or not?

llnaughty November 1 2005, 01:37:03 UTC

One of the basic rules of jurisdiction for any US court (state or federal) is that it always has jurisdiction to decide whether it has jurisdiction to hear a case. The decision can be overturned by a higher court, but for SCOTUS there is no higher court so we just have to trust that they only hear things within their jurisdiction.

Kevin C

llnaughty November 1 2005, 02:02:13 UTC

thanks for explaining it to a non-lawyer. :-)

moppety November 1 2005, 00:48:14 UTC

Like SN, I vaguely have heard of this, but not in a "legalese" way. More of "in a story" way. So I guess that doesn't help all that much, huh?