Brief on Behalf of the National Black Law Students Association as Amicus Curiae in Buck v. Davis

Abstract

This Amicus Curiae Brief was filed on behalf of the National Black Law Students Association in Buck v. Davis, on appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. Duane Buck was convicted of capital murder in Texas. During the penalty phase, Mr. Buck's own defense attorney presented the testimony of a clinical psychologist who said that he included race in his future dangerousness analysis because Blacks and Latinos are overrepresented in the criminal justice system. On cross examination, the prosecution prompted the psychologist to clarify his position and the psychologist stated that the fact that Mr. Buck is Black created a greater likelihood of future dangerousness. The jury found that Mr. Buck was a future danger and sentenced him to death. The amicus curiae brief recounts the history of the stereotype that Black people are unusually dangerous and how the narrative of Black dangerousness remains a part of our cultural view. The brief argues that the effect of this relentless narrative is that national debates about race — from criminal justice reform to parenting to education to housing — are driven by and even resolved with the idea of the excessive criminality of Black people. The brief drew examples ranging from the racial disparities in school discipline to the media and social media using the word thug more than 625 times the day after Black professional football player Richard Sherman bragged about his athletic abilities, to the murder of Trayvon Martin. The brief also argues that when there are racial appeals in the criminal justice system, procedural hurdles should not be interpreted to prevent review.