I have no PhD; you are confusing me with one of your other targets.  I hadn't read McCleskey before now.

"To prevail under that Clause, petitioner must prove that the decisionmakers in his case acted with discriminatory purpose. Petitioner offered no evidence specific to his own case that would support an  inference that racial considerations played a part in his sentence, and the Baldus study is insufficient." 
 
"For this claim to prevail, petitioner would have to prove that the Georgia Legislature enacted or maintained the death penalty statute because of an anticipated racially discriminatory effect." 

There is no evidence that the legislature either enacted the statute to further a racially discriminatory purpose or maintained the statute because of the racially disproportionate impact suggested by the Baldus study."

There is no merit to the contention that the Baldus study shows that Georgia's capital punishment system is arbitrary and capricious in application. 

Seems okay.