In re Wood
This text of 140 U.S. 370 (In re Wood) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Concurring opinion of
I concur in the judgment in this case, but not in all the-views expressed in the opinion. I adhere -to what I said ■ in my dissent in the case of Neal v. Delaware, 103 U. S. 370, 405, 409, that there is nothing in the late amendments to the Constitution, the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth, which requires that colored citizens shall be summoned on juries, [371]*371grand or petit, in order to secure to persons of their race justice and equality in the administration of the law; and, further, that the manner in which, jurors to serve in . the state courts shall be selected, and the qualifications they shall possess, are matters entirely of state regulation.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
140 U.S. 370, 11 S. Ct. 942, 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-wood-scotus-1891.