SCOTUS won't take case of schizophrenic Black man convicted of killing family by all-white jury

3 jurors expressed opposition to interracial marriage on their jury questionnaires

ByAriane de Vogue, CNN Supreme Court Reporter, CNNWire
Tuesday, October 11, 2022
ABC11 24/7 Streaming Channel
Watch Eyewitness News, First Alert Weather, and original programming.

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court declined on Tuesday to take up the case of a Black man on death row for killing his estranged wife, who was white, and two children, including their interracial child, CNN reported.

The vote was 6-3, with Justice Sonia Sotomayor and liberal colleagues Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissenting from the court's order.

SEE ALSO | Supreme Court allows defamation case against MyPillow CEO to continue

Andre Lee Thomas was convicted to death by an all-white jury, including three jurors who expressed opposition to interracial marriage on their jury questionnaires. Thomas' counsel at the time raised no objection about the three jurors.

Thomas, suffering from severe schizophrenia, murdered his wife, Laura Christine Boren, and the children before attempting to take his own life in 2004. Days later, in his jail cell, Thomas gouged out his right eye.

"Thomas' case undermines principles this Court has repeatedly and forcefully protected: the right to an impartial jury, and the recognition that overt racial bias in the criminal justice system must be eradicated," Sherrilyn Ifill, a lawyer for Thomas, argued in court papers.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton urged the court not to step in, noting in court papers that Thomas' counsel had "questioned one of the jurors at issue about racial bias extensively in voir dire" and that "the trial court ensured that the other two could render an impartial verdict in view of the evidence, and the record shows other reasons why defense counsel might have wanted these jurors to serve on the jury."

Texas also claimed that Thomas' trial counsel was "experienced" and made "strategic decisions" concerning the extent they questioned the jurors at issue about their views on interracial marriage. The state says the defense used its preemptory strikes on jurors who "in their view" would have been much worse than those seated.

(The-CNN-Wire & 2021 Cable News Network, Inc., a Time Warner Company. All rights reserved.)