Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-5924_n6io.pdf
Page Number: 28

Cite as:  590 U. S. ____ (2020) 

25 

Opinion of the Court 
Opinion of GORSUCH, J. 

a unanimous jury trial has “little practical importance go-
ing forward.”75  In the dissent’s telling, Louisiana has “abol-
ished” nonunanimous verdicts and Oregon “seemed on the
verge of doing the same until the Court intervened.”76  But, 
as the dissent itself concedes, a ruling for Louisiana would 
invite  other  States  to  relax  their  own  unanimity  require-
ments.77  In fact, 14 jurisdictions have already told us that 
they would value the right to “experiment” with nonunani-
mous juries.78  Besides, Louisiana’s law bears only prospec-
tive  effect,  so  the  State  continues  to  allow  nonunanimous 
verdicts for crimes committed before 2019.79  And while the 
dissent speculates that our grant of certiorari contributed
to the failure of legal reform efforts in Oregon, its citation
does not support its surmise.  No doubt, too, those who risk 
being  subjected  to  nonunanimous  juries  in  Louisiana  and 
Oregon today, and elsewhere tomorrow, would dispute the 
dissent’s suggestion that their Sixth Amendment rights are 
of “little practical importance.”

That point suggests another.  In its valiant search for re-
liance  interests,  the  dissent  somehow  misses  maybe  the
most important one:  the reliance interests of the American 
people.  Taken at its word, the dissent would have us dis-
card  a  Sixth  Amendment  right  in  perpetuity  rather  than
ask two States to retry a slice of their prior criminal cases. 
Whether that slice turns out to be large or small, it cannot 
outweigh the interest we all share in the preservation of our 
constitutionally promised liberties.  Indeed, the dissent can 
cite no case in which the one-time need to retry defendants 
has  ever  been  sufficient  to  inter  a  constitutional  right 
forever. 

—————— 
75 Post, at 2. 
76 Ibid. 
77 Post, at 3. 
78 Brief for State of Utah et al. as Amici Curiae 1. 
79 See 2018 La. Reg. Sess., Act 722.