Akins v. Texas

Summary

The Court affirmed Akins's conviction, holding that the record did not establish that the jury commissioners deliberately limited Black representation on the grand jury to one member. It explained that racial disproportionality on a single grand jury does not itself establish purposeful discrimination and gave substantial respect to the state courts' resolution of conflicting testimony. The Court expressly left unresolved whether an intentional racial limitation approximating the proportion of eligible jurors would violate the Fourteenth Amendment. It also rejected a due process challenge to the assignment of the trial judge. Justice Rutledge concurred in the result without a separate writing; Chief Justice Stone and Justice Black dissented without separate writings. Justice Murphy separately dissented, arguing that the commissioners' testimony conclusively established an unconstitutional racial limitation and that numerical racial restrictions violate equal protection even when intended to ensure some representation.