Home › Case briefs › Constitutional Law

Strauder v. West Virginia

Supreme Court of the United States · 1879 · Constitutional Law

Constitutional LawEqual ProtectionJury DiscriminationRemoval JurisdictionFourteenth AmendmentFourteenth Amendmentequal protectionjury selection

Facts

Strauder, a colored man, was indicted for murder in Ohio County, West Virginia. Before trial, he petitioned for removal to federal court, alleging that under West Virginia law no colored man was eligible for grand or petit jury service, while white men were eligible, so he could not receive the full and equal benefit of the laws enjoyed by white citizens. The state court denied removal and later overruled his motions to quash the venire, challenge the array, seek a new trial, and arrest judgment. The governing state statute provided that all white male citizens of the state over twenty-one were liable to serve as jurors, with certain state officials excepted.

Issue

Does the Fourteenth Amendment protect a criminal defendant against a state law that excludes all persons of his race from grand and petit jury service solely because of race or color? If so, may Congress authorize removal of the prosecution to federal court when the denial appears from the state's law?

Rule

The Fourteenth Amendment forbids state laws that discriminate against persons because of race or color by denying them equal legal protection, including laws excluding all persons of a race from jury service solely because of race. A defendant need not show a right to a jury containing members of his own race; rather, he is entitled to a jury selected without legal discrimination against his race. Congress may protect that right through appropriate legislation, including a statute authorizing pretrial removal of a state criminal prosecution to federal court when the defendant is denied or cannot enforce equal civil rights in the state tribunals.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In Alabama, a statute provides that only white citizens over age twenty-one may serve on grand or petit juries. Darius Cole, a Black defendant charged with burglary in Birmingham, objects before trial that the statute bars every qualified Black citizen from jury service solely because of race.

How should the court rule on Darius's constitutional objection?

Explanation. The majority held that a state law expressly excluding all persons of a race from jury service solely because of race or color denies equal protection to a defendant of that race. The injury is the legal discrimination in jury selection, not merely the actual bias of the jurors selected. The defendant need not prove a particular excluded juror would have sat.