Jim Crow’s Last Stand in Louisiana and Reviewing Library Diversity and Inclusion Implementation

As our country seemingly becomes more and more politically divided, and in some cases ethically divided, I feel excitement and fear about the vote tomorrow. I feel excitement because tomorrow will likely (and hopefully) be a historic day for the state of Louisiana. Tomorrow the residents of Louisiana get to vote on a ballot measure that could end the state’s split-jury system.

The split jury is a vestige of the 1898 Louisiana Constitution. It was implemented to more easily create and control free labor through “convict leasing,” recapturing the free black population using the justice system. In fact, looking back at records from the Louisiana Constitutional Convention of 1898, several measures including the split-jury measure sought explicitly to “establish the supremacy of the white race.” The split-jury system only remains in two states: Louisiana and Oregon. However, even in Oregon, all 12 jurors must agree on the verdict when considering murder charges. In Louisiana, that is not the case; only 10 out 12 jurors are needed for someone to be sentenced to life in prison. This system, which has been dubbed “Jim Crow’s Last Stand,” was put into place after the Civil War and the abolition of slavery.

The opposition to today’s ballot measure to end the split jury believes that it will be more difficult to obtain a just result and that unanimous juries will ultimately hold up the justice system. It believes that mistrials and hung juries will delay justice for victims and their families.

Why Is This Important to Librarians?

AALL has had its own history and growth with diversity and inclusion throughout its inception (you can read more about in a short article by Frank G. Houdek). Further, AALL Special Interest Sections and Caucuses over the years have been developed specifically for diversity and inclusion. Libraries themselves must be dedicated to principles of social justice, diversity and equity in all facets—staff, collection, even services and programing. More importantly, for librarians specifically, as purveyors and guardians of information, our duty is to commit ourselves to diversity and inclusion, because we cannot (in my opinion) fully provide access to information without practicing diversity and inclusion.

What does this look like? There are no simple, one-size-fits-all answers. A good starting point is AALL Diversity and Inclusion in Law Libraries: Resources. If you are ambitious, you might even take the time to write a “Diversity & Inclusion” or mission statement for your library, so you have an outline of what is important to your institution and the next steps you may need to take to be more inclusive.

Focusing on our libraries is of course a more local approach, but if you do want to get more global, where to start is simple—Go vote today.

And the next time you hear from me, I will hopefully be writing to you from a unanimous jury state.


About bwadler

Brandon is a Reference Librarian (and unofficial Rare Book Librarian and Inter Library Loan Librarian) at Loyola University New Orleans College of Law Library. She joined Loyola Law after nearly two years of service to the judiciary at the Louisiana Supreme Court in the Law Library of Louisiana. A graduate of the Loyola New Orleans College of Law, Brandon completed her J.D. in Common Law with a certificate in Civil Law. In addition, Brandon has a Master's degree in Information Science from the Florida State University. She focuses on Louisiana legal history and issues concerning access to information. Her research interests include: mixed jurisdictions, rare law books, Spanish and Louisiana legal history, canon law, the intersection of law, religion, and society, and the relationship of graphic novels and the law. Brandon is the President of the New Orleans Association of Law Libraries and is an active member of the American Association of Law Libraries as a contributor to the RIPS Blog and an Outreach Committee member for the Legal History and Rare Book Special Interest Section.
This entry was posted in Access to Justice, Issues in Law Librarianship, Issues in Librarianship (generally), Legal Ethics, Legislative history, Patron Services, Reference Services, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s