Pitchford v. Cain (U.S. Supreme Court, May 2026)

The Federal Docket

September 29, 2026

Petitioner Terry Pitchford was tried for capital murder in Mississippi. During jury selection, the prosecutor used peremptory strikes against four of the five Black prospective jurors. Pitchford raised an objection under Batson v. Kentucky, and the prosecutor offered facially race-neutral reasons for the strikes. The trial judge accepted those reasons but moved on without giving defense counsel an opportunity to argue that the explanations were pretextual. When counsel later attempted to return to the issue, the judge cut off the argument while stating that the objection was preserved.

The jury, composed of eleven White jurors and one Black juror, convicted Pitchford and sentenced him to death. The Mississippi Supreme Court concluded that Pitchford had waived his Batson pretext argument. A federal district court later granted habeas relief, but the Fifth Circuit reversed under The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA).

The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the Fifth Circuit in a 5–4 decision. Writing for the majority, Justice Kavanaugh explained that Batson requires three steps: the defendant makes a prima facie showing of discrimination; the prosecutor supplies a race-neutral explanation; and the defense receives an opportunity to show that the stated explanation is pretextual before the trial judge decides whether purposeful discrimination occurred. The Mississippi trial court never completed that third step.

The Supreme Court further held that the Mississippi Supreme Court unreasonably determined that Pitchford waived the issue. Defense counsel repeatedly attempted to pursue the Batson objection, and the trial judge expressly assured counsel that the objection was preserved. Although AEDPA requires substantial deference to state-court decisions, the Court reiterated that “deference does not mean abdication.”

Justice Gorsuch, joined by Justices Thomas, Alito, and Barrett, dissented. The dissent argued that AEDPA required deference to Mississippi’s preservation ruling and that the state court reasonably concluded that Pitchford had failed to present his pretext argument at the appropriate time.

Certiorari to the Fifth Circuit

Opinion by Kavanaugh, joined by Roberts, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Jackson

Dissenting opinion by Gorsuch, joined by Thomas, Alito, and Barrett

Click here to read the opinion.

Tom Church - Tom is a trial and appellate lawyer focusing on criminal defense and civil trials. Tom is the author of "The Federal Docket" and is a contributor to Mercer Law Review's Annual Survey in the areas of federal sentencing guidelines and criminal law. Tom graduated with honors from the University of Georgia Law School where he served as a research assistant to the faculty in the areas of constitutional law and civil rights litigation. Read Tom's reviews on AVVO. Follow Tom on Linkedin.

Scroll to Top