Promise of Justice Marks Two Years Post Ramos v. Louisiana and Louisiana Supreme Court to Hear Argument on the Fate of 1500 cases on May 10, 2022

April 20, 2022 marks two years since the U.S. Supreme Court decided Ramos v. Louisiana. In that case, the U.S. Supreme Court said that Louisiana and Oregon were convicting people with split jury verdicts in violation of the constitution, and that Louisiana’s law was a Jim Crow law designed to silence the voices of Black jurors and convict more Black people.

In these two years, around 100 people with recent trials had their convictions vacated. However, for the approximately 1,500 people with the Jim Crow jury verdicts, it is still unsure what will be their fate.

The Promise of Justice Initiative was one of the counsel for Mr. Evangelisto Ramos in the U.S. Supreme Court. Since that day, the small law office has partnered with more than 750 lawyers from Seattle to Singapore to represent 1,049 men and women who remain in prison with these unconstitutional convictions.

By the two year anniversary, the State of Louisiana will have spent approximately $55,000,000 in costs to continue incarcerating people unconstitutionally convicted.

Several bills are in the legislature could provide relief for these unconstitutional Jim Crow convictions. HB258 by Rep. Mandie Landry will allow people who have non-unanimous jury verdicts to be eligible to serve on juries immediately after they complete their sentences. The bill will be heard on April 20. Three other bills relate to the non-unanimous jury verdict: HB271 by Rep. Hughes, HB577 by Rep. Willard, HB744 by Rep. Gaines. Their hearings have not been scheduled yet.

In the meantime, several District Attorney’s Offices have started reviewing these cases and are working on ways to address the injustice that occurred.

Louisiana Supreme Court to Hear Argument

On May 10, 2022 the Louisiana Supreme Court will hear arguments in Reddick v. Louisiana, which will decide the fate of 1,500 people who remain incarcerated with Jim Crow jury convictions.

Reginald Reddick was convicted and sentenced to life in prison despite two of his jurors harboring doubts about his guilt. No physical evidence linked Reginald Reddick to the crime, and the only direct evidence testimony came from a man who matched the description of a potential suspect. That witness’s account of the evening differed from every other witness to testify.