With his white handlebar mustache, Levon “Bo” Jones was a striking and unmistakable presence. Mr. Jones, a Black man from Duplin County, North Carolina, was wrongfully convicted in 1993 and sentenced to death. After 14 years on death row, Mr. Jones, who had always maintained his innocence, was exonerated and released in 2008. We were among the lawyers working with Mr. Jones to win his freedom.

In 2009, Mr. Jones was among three death row exonerees — found guilty and sentenced by all-white or nearly all-white juries — who lobbied in support of novel and transformative legislation that would allow people on death row to challenge their convictions if they could show race played a significant factor in their prosecution. Out of that effort, the state legislature passed the North Carolina Racial Justice Act (RJA).

The RJA was a historic and overdue piece of legislation that sought to rectify long standing racial injustices in death penalty cases. After its momentous passage in 2009, more than 100 people on death row filed RJA claims, challenging their convictions. We represented several of these people, bringing some of the first successful cases under the RJA and reducing four people’s sentences from death to life.

Unfortunately, a new conservative majority in the North Carolina Legislature repealed the law four years after it was passed.

But the fight for justice never stopped. After a lengthy legal battle, the North Carolina Supreme Court ruled, in 2020, that all lawsuits brought under the RJA before its repeal could still move forward.

That brings us to this month, where, in a landmark hearing, we’ll be back in court arguing on behalf of Hasson Bacote, a Black man who was sentenced to death after the prosecution prevented multiple qualified Black jurors from serving on his jury. He argues that race played an impermissible role in jury selection, not just in his case, but in all death penalty cases in North Carolina.

We will come to court with statistical, case specific, and historical evidence that racial discrimination tainted jury selection in Mr. Bacote’s case, in Johnston County (where Mr. Bacote was prosecuted), and the entire state.

In Mr. Bacote’s case, the prosecution struck three times more Black prospective jurors than white prospective jurors. In Johnston County, prosecutors struck prospective jurors of color at nearly twice the rate of white prospective jurors in all capital cases. A similar pattern emerges across the state: in North Carolina capital cases, prosecutors struck Black prospective jurors at nearly twice the rate of white jurors.

North Carolina v. Hasson Bacote

Hasson Bacote, a Black man from Johnston County, is challenging his death sentence under the North Carolina Racial Justice Act.

How have prosecutors gotten away with this?

In all criminal cases that go to trial, prosecutors and defense attorneys have what are known as “peremptory strikes” — that is, an attorney can remove a certain number of potential jurors for any reason. Often, prosecutors exclude Black jurors on the basis of their race.

Even though the landmark 1986 Supreme Court case, Batson v. Kentucky, prohibited peremptory strikes on the basis of race or gender, unconstitutional juror discrimination persists.

Often, prosecutors offer pretextual — or disingenuous — reasons for excluding Black jurors and other jurors of color. In our previous RJA case, North Carolina v. Robinson, a judge found North Carolina prosecutors excluded Black jurors for pretextual, even irrational, reasons, interrogated Black jurors with invasive questions not posed to white jurors, and struck Black jurors even though they allowed white jurors with similar characteristics to remain in the jury pool.

We even have evidence of overt racism in jury selection which we’ve presented in past RJA cases. One prosecutor wrote in his notes that a Black juror with a criminal record was a “thug” while a white juror with a criminal record was “a fine guy;” a Black juror was described as a “blk wino” while a white juror with a DUI conviction was a “country boy – ok.” In another case, a prosecutor noted on a juror questionnaire that a Black woman was “too dumb.”

The effect of outright or pretextual racial discrimination is ultimately the same: Black prospective jurors are excluded from jury service at greater rates than white prospective jurors, and a person facing capital punishment is judged by a jury not of their peers.

The results of these unrepresentative juries are stark: Since 1990, every Black person facing a capital prosecution in Johnston County has been sentenced to death.

Participation in the jury box is one of the fundamental ways Americans engage with their democracy. Even though the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth amendments conferred citizenship rights and equal protection to Black Americans, the right to serve in a jury remains compromised by racial discrimination. Jury service — like the right to vote — is a question of democracy. Who do we consider part of our community, whose voices matter, who has power.

Levon “Bo” Jones’ voice mattered. Even though he was disenfranchised for the years he was wrongfully convicted, he became a powerful voice for freedom and equal justice. Because of his efforts and the efforts of other Black exonerees — survivors of the racist death penalty and criminal legal system — our client Hasson Bacote will have his day in court on February 26, and the opportunity to win relief for his case, and a ruling that could mean relief for almost all of North Carolina’s death row.

Race has always been at the center of the death penalty. The RJA challenges give North Carolina the rare legal opportunity to confront that shameful fact. In court this month, we will take another step with our client Mr. Bacote to shed light on and rectify the harms that racism has caused in our legal system.

North Carolina passes the current law authorizing the death penalty. Johnston County removes the KKK billboards that line the highway into Smithfield, the County Seat.

In McCleskey v. Kemp, the Supreme Court majority holds that, despite statistical evidence of racial discrimination in Georgia’s administration of the death penalty, there is no Equal Protection violation because the petitioner, Warren McCleskey, couldn’t show overt racial discrimination occurred in his case.

A federal Racial Justice Act bill is drafted in response to McCleskey. The federal RJA ultimately passed the House of Representatives in 1992 and in 1994, but failed in the Senate.

Kentucky becomes the first state to enact a Racial Justice Act statute.

Three Black men, Jonathan Hoffman, Levon Jones, and Glen Chapman, are exonerated from death row in North Carolina. All three innocent men, wrongfully convicted by all-white or nearly all-white juries, become inspired to help other people wrongfully convicted on the basis of race.

Mr. Jones, Mr. Hoffman, and Mr. Chapman join with Darryl Hunt, another wrongfully convicted person charged with capital murder and later exonerated, to lobby the North Carolina Legislature. North Carolina enacted the Racial Justice Act in August, allowing people on death row to challenge their sentences if they could show race played a significant factor. The North Carolina law is the first law in the country to specify that statistical evidence of discrimination in jury selection and/or jury sentencing is sufficient proof to set aside a death sentence.

Our client, Hasson Bacote, is convicted of felony murder in Johnston County. Like every Black man tried in Johnston County, Mr. Bacote receives the death penalty.

In August, more than 100 people on North Carolina’s death row filed RJA motions. At least 30 of those people were sentenced to death by all-white juries.

In November, control of the North Carolina General Assembly flipped from Democratic control to Republican control. A single Republican donor, Art Pope, was connected to 75 percent of all outside group spending on the race, spending millions on small local campaigns. Some of these groups ran ads deliberately attacking candidates for voting for the Racial Justice Act. Ironically, these ads profiled Henry McCollum, a Black man then on North Carolina’s death row who would ultimately be exonerated.

North Carolina Gov. Beverly Perdue issued pardons of innocence to the defendants in the Wilmington 10 case on December 31, citing “the dominant role that racism played in jury selection.” The prosecution’s jury selection notes included overt race-based bias, such as a capital B written next to the name of every Black juror, and “KKK good!!” written next to the names of at least six prospective jurors.

The first RJA case in the country is heard by a superior court judge in Cumberland County in North Carolina v. Robinson. The death row petitioner, Marcus Robinson, proved widespread discrimination in jury selection across North Carolina, in Cumberland County, and in his own case. Three other cases were heard in Cumberland County later that year based on similar evidence, and those challengers, Tilmon Golphin, Christina Walters, and Quintel Augustine, also prevailed. The state sought review of these decisions by the North Carolina Supreme Court.

The North Carolina Legislature repealed the Racial Justice Act on June 19 and overrode the governor’s veto.

The North Carolina Supreme Court held that prosecutors should have been given more time to prepare for the Cumberland County RJA hearings, vacated the decisions, and remanded for new cases. This meant that the Robinson and other Cumberland County case orders had no precedential value.

A North Carolina Superior Court dismissed the claims of Mr. Robinson and the other three people in Cumberland County, holding that the legislature’s repeal was retroactive and required dismissal of their cases. The four defendants sought review.

Charles Finch, a Black man, is exonerated from North Carolina’s death row. Mr. Finch is the 12th person exonerated in North Carolina since the death penalty was reinstated in 1973. Eleven of the 12 men exonerated are men of color and 10 are Black men.

In State v. Ramseur, and State v. Burke, the North Carolina Supreme Court held that application of the repeal to bar review of properly-filed RJA claims violated the Ex Post Facto clause of the North Carolina Constitution. This ruling effectively reinstated the more than 100 filed claims by people on death row, including Hasson Bacote.

In State v. Robinson, the Hon. Justice Cheri L. Beasley, the first African-American woman to serve as Chief Justice of the North Carolina Supreme Court, wrote for the majority in an opinion that cataloged the history of Black citizens’ exclusion from jury service in the United States and North Carolina, and the failure of state appellate courts to confront the problem. The state Supreme Court reinstated the life sentences of Marcus Robinson, Tilmon Golphin, Christina Walters, and Quintel Augustine.

On January 5, Governor DeWine introduced draft rules that, if implemented, would have resulted in thousands of transgender people in Ohio going without the health care they need, and forcing many to move out of their home state — including my friend, Emma. Due to an outpouring of dissent from the trans community, those proposed rules will not go into effect.

For years, politicians across the nation have been pushing legislation that would block critical gender-affirming medical care for transgender people, taking life-saving health care decisions out of the hands of trans people, their doctors, and their families, and putting it in the hands of politicians. Much of this legislation has focused on spreading inaccuracies and stoking fear specifically about care for trans youth. But the Ohio government tried to take it even further. DeWine’s proposed rules were the most extreme regulations on medical treatment for transgender adults anywhere in the United States, and would have prevented children and adults alike from receiving medically-necessary care. These changes were not based in any medical science, and were proposed against the recommendations of every major medical organization in the nation, despite the outcries from the trans community.

Emma and I are both born and raised Ohioans. We have frequently shared our fear and disappointment in the actions of Ohio’s political leaders and how out of touch they are with the wants and needs of Ohio communities. We were both part of the thousands of people who submitted comments in opposition to the opposed rules, and we both know that this is a victory worth celebrating — but also that these planned attacks against the trans community in Ohio are not in the past. I sat down with Emma to talk through what these proposed bans would have meant for her and her trans community, and how we can continue working to defend trans rights in Ohio and across the nation.

Hanna: How would the proposed changes to transgender health care access in Ohio have impacted you? How would they have impacted your friends and other trans people in the state?

Emma: I’ve lived my whole life in Ohio. It’s my home, somewhere I can be myself and be supported by my friends and family. Since the proposed changes were announced, I’ve seen the future I envisioned for myself here change drastically. If trans health care access was restricted for adults, many of us would be forced to move. Friends had told me all the places they’re considering moving to, and others were planning on leaving the country entirely. I know plenty of others, myself included, who want to stay and fight it. It’s hard though. To make it through the day, you have to have some sort of plan about what to do when things get bad. If I am ever forced to [leave], I know I’ll be able to move somewhere and be okay, but not everyone can move; it’s expensive, and it’s daunting to have to find a job somewhere else away from our friends and families.

Hanna: How do the limits on health care for trans youth tie into the proposed restrictions for the care you receive?

Emma: If you’re a trans kid in Ohio, you’re being told that you can’t be who you want to be until you’re an adult. You reach adulthood, and then the state still is typing to put laws in place to limit your access to health care. It’s just cruel because it makes it that much harder to be hopeful as a trans kid. Suicide rates among trans youth are already frighteningly high, and we know how to lower them. This is why we spread mantras like Protect Trans Kids, they’re in an increasingly difficult situation and need support. The proposed changes made me more concerned for trans youth in particular, because I think it would be really difficult to remain hopeful in the face of these extra barriers. You’d have to make it to adulthood, save money not just for the myriad of expenses that are typical for transition, but also to move out of state. To all trans kids, I want you to know that things will get better. It’s up to the rest of us to fight back and make sure we’re providing a future to look forward to for the trans youth of Ohio.

Hanna: What can people do to help, whether they’re in Ohio or wanting to support from afar when these kind of attacks on trans care are introduced by politicians?

Emma: People can do a couple things to show support. First, check in on your trans friends and family. It’s pretty hard on our mental health when laws like this are proposed or passed, even if they’re eventually defeated, and it’s helpful to know that our loved ones are here for us. It is incredibly stressful thinking about how these changes would impact our access to health care. Outside of that, we need help pushing back on the laws themselves. Show up to protests, submit your feedback online, or call your representatives to let them know how you feel about anti-trans legislation. Right now, trans people are looking to our friends to speak up and speak out. We can’t fight this battle alone. If you can, there are many great organizations worth donating to as well, like the ACLU, the ACLU of Ohio, or the TransOhio Emergency Fund, to both push back on harmful legislation and provide trans people with much needed assistance.

The Way Forward for Trans Justice

The Way Forward for Trans Justice

Last year, states passed a record number of bills restricting health care, athletics, public accommodations, expression, and educational materials for trans people — trans kids, more specifically. With the turn of a new year, the situation continu...

Last year, states passed a record number of bills restricting health care, athletics, public accommodations, expression, and educational materials for trans people — trans kids, more specifically. With the turn of a new year, the situation continu...

Visit this episode

Hanna: What would it mean for you and your community if DeWine’s proposed changes to trans health care had taken effect?

Emma: It would have been devastating, because we’ve fought for this to be our home. It would have been a very clear announcement that we aren’t welcome here, and that legislators will keep trying to push us out. Not everyone can afford to move to the safety of another state. It’s already a struggle for some trans adults to access medical care, largely because of long wait times. I think these proposed changes would have worsened that issue and placed an unfair burden on trans people that would have negatively affected our physical and mental health. I didn’t believe these changes were an accurate representation of what the people of Ohio wanted, and I’m grateful that with enough awareness, people provided the support we needed to shut down these proposals. It was an immeasurable relief that the proposals were changed, thanks to a massive influx of comments from the community. I think there’s more to be done, it’s easy to fall into a false sense of security now that some provisions have been walked back, but the reality is trans youth is still actively affected and trans adults remain a political target. We need to keep this energy, this outpouring of support, to prevent future attempts by the state against trans rights.

Hanna: How has access to gender-affirming care affected your quality of life?

Emma: Unequivocally, I can say gender-affirming care saved my life. It’s difficult for me to explain what it was like before I came out and had access to gender-affirming care. I had been dangerously depressed for a long time and didn’t have hope that things were going to get better. It felt like I was living someone else’s life, where none of the pieces fit. I think from the outside it seemed like I should have been happy. I had a loving family, a great group of friends, and did well in school. The reality was that I was disconnected from it, and tried desperately to hide how hopeless I felt. I was unaware that there were other people like me, and there were resources to help transition. Luckily, I came out and had support from friends and family. I’m truly happy with my life now, and hopeful for my future. Gender-affirming care isn’t just hormones or surgeries, it’s a whole range of things that might not be the same for everyone. For me, the first thing was seeing a therapist who helped me work through my anxieties related to transitioning, then other medical professionals to start hormone replacement therapy. They made sure I was well informed through every step in the process. It lifted that weight off my shoulders, helped me feel at home in my body. Being happy in your body is fundamental, and because of that, I’m able to find joy in things I didn’t before. The reality was that before, hobbies were just a way to distract myself, and now they’re things I choose to pursue for happiness. I’ve picked up softball, reading, music, and even sewing. I attribute the change in my mental health completely to gender-affirming care, it’s helped me to see myself and life in a new light. Gender-affirming care gave me the hope I needed to continue, and I’m thankful everyday for it.

Since the beginning of the 2020 redistricting cycle, the ACLU of Florida has worked across North Florida to help small counties update their maps through redistricting, the process of redrawing congressional, state legislative or local districts to account for population growth or loss. Many of North Florida’s smallest counties and cities of which have not been updated since the 1980s. We’re proud of these efforts, which have increased Black voting power in some of the most neglected communities in North Florida. 

But we would be shortsighted not to thank and highlight some of the amazing Black women who have led this project and get minimal credit not just for their efforts in redistricting, but for being leaders in their communities. 

We honor their leadership, commitment, and advocacy for their communities. 

Linda Franklin

Ms. Franklin is the former President and current 3rd Vice President of the Jackson County NAACP. The leader heard Jackson County had plans to redraw local maps and swung into action. Ms. Franklin, partnering with the ACLU of Florida, convinced the county and school district to adopt a plan protecting Black representation for years to come. We salute Ms. Franklin for her leadership and are proud to have worked with her.

Carolyn Spooner

Ms. Spooner is currently the first Black woman to serve on the Bradford County Commission. Born in Starke, Ms. Spooner has been a cornerstone in her community. In 1986, she was a plaintiff in the landmark class-action lawsuit which dismantled Bradford County’s discriminatory electoral system and permitted Black voters to participate equally in local politics for the first time since Reconstruction. But, she did not stop there. Ms. Spooner went on to serve on the Bradford County Historical Board and the Governor’s Martin Luther King Jr. Day Celebration Commission. She was elected to and served on the Starke City Commission for 13 years and was chosen by her colleagues to be the Mayor for three terms. In 2020, she became the first Black woman elected to the County Commission, which she now chairs. 

Ms. Spooner helped to make Bradford County maps more equitable, and she was instrumental in persuading the board to redistrict, ensuring Black voters have equitable representation on the County Commission and School Board. We thank her for her work.

VeEtta Hagan

Ms. Hagan currently serves on the Madison County School Board in District 3. She was elected to the School Board in 2014 and again in 2022. She was instrumental in leading the audit of former Madison County football coach Mike Coe, who stole thousands of dollars in district money. Ms. Hagan was crucial in leading the County Commission and School Board to help preserve and strengthen Black voting power, successfully pushing both boards to adopt a plan with two majority-Black seats, as the Voting Rights Act requires. We are grateful for her.

Shirley Scott

Ms. Scott was born and raised in Perry, Florida. Growing up in the Jim Crow South, Ms. Scott speaks frequently about the challenges she encountered. From being banned from walking certain streets on Election Day, to being deprived of paved roads or indoor plumbing by an all-white government that ignored her segregated neighborhood, Ms. Scott was undeterred. In her early years, she was a beloved school teacher in Perry. 

Ms. Scott expanded her career in education to community activism. In 1983, she helped organize four civil rights lawsuits in her community. One of those lawsuits was against the county for inadequately funding infrastructure in Black neighborhoods, and three others against Taylor County, the school district, and the City of Perry for maintaining discriminatory election systems that deprived Black voters of equal representation.

All four lawsuits were successful. Ms. Scott went on to serve on the Perry City Council, becoming one of its first Black council members. 

Ms. Scott lives a happy life in retirement now, helping advocate for a new fair Taylor County Commission map this year. We thank her for everything she has done, a true pioneer in her community. 

These are some of the Black leaders who have carried these redistricting efforts to course. We also thank Thomas Demps, Deidra Dunnell, Carolyn Donaldson, Clarice Cooper, and so many more. 

The ACLU of Florida is proud of the work we have done in the state's rural areas and small towns, meeting with and learning about leaders in these communities. However, with the tireless work of these formidable Black women, the movement for voting rights has remained alive and well. 

Joe Dye is a legal program associate and redistricting data analyst for the ACLU of Florida.