Facial discrimination is simply that the law is discriminatory on its face as it makes explicit distinctions between classes of persons. Discriminatory application occurs where the law is neutral on its face but is applied in a different manner to different classes of persons.
If a person can show that government officials applying the law have a discriminatory purpose, the law will be invalidated. Discriminatory motive occurs when the law is neutral on its face and in its application but will have a disproportionate impact on a particular class of persons. Although statistical studies alone are not enough to prove discriminatory motive, when combined with other evidence it can suffice. McCleskey v. Kemp, 481 U.S. 279 (1987).
In the case at hand,...
As to discriminatory motive, the Supreme Court is correct in holding that statistical evidence alone is not enough to show discriminatory motive. However, if the Defendant provided other, non-statistical evidence to supplement this statistical evidence, then the Supreme Court's ruling is incorrect.
Further, the Supreme Court erred in failing to rule on the case as a discriminatory application case. Here, the capital punishment law itself is neutral on its face. However, its application clearly has a discriminatory effect. The application of a law to a particular class of individuals can be shown by statistical evidence. The Supreme Court's decision that statistical evidence plays no role in proving application of a law is unreasonable and ungrounded as there is no other method to show unequal application.
