The Curious Case of 'Smith Dakota v. North Carolina': The Pathology of a Bad Cite in East Africa

Abstract

This article was roused by errors. Its catalyst is the widespread misciting and misquoting of a US Supreme Court case by courts in Uganda and Kenya. The maltreated case is South Dakota v. North Carolina, 192 U.S. 286 (1904). Although this case is not prominent in recent American jurisprudence, it has managed to rise to prominence in East Africa. Unfortunately, the case’s eminence is marred by the courts’ failure to properly cite to and quote from the case. This article explores reasons why Ugandan and Kenyan appellate courts consistently miscite and misquote the case. By examining the causes that sustain the misreferencing we increase our understanding of the conditions and challenges facing common law judicial craft in post-colonial settings. Certain analytical perspectives are useful in this analysis. This article presents historic, socio-legal and comparative content to provide useful contextual grounding. Because this article is written for an American legal audience, the article uses American legal history and development as a comparative foil. The broader aim of this article is to improve the way that post-colonial judiciaries engage in and take ownership of the common law process. The article concludes with lessons that can be used going forward.