Race and the Law: The Trials of Ossian Sweet and the Scottsboro Boys

There exists a myriad of reasons for why the law played out differently in two very similar cases; the trial of Ossian Sweet and his co-defendants versus that of the nine Black young men in the "Scottsboro case." The two cases resembled each other in a number of ways; however, the enormous circumstances that differentiate the two cases led to a disparity in judgment. The objective of this paper is to analyze the way in which the law was drawn differently in the two cases, and how the circumstances for each dictated the decisions. Ultimately, this analysis and understanding provides us with distinctions in the law between theory and practice. The final objective of the paper will be taking into account this issue in regards to race and the observations from both cases.

In analyzing the cases it's important to understand the material and abstract causality for separate and opposing decisions that resulted from these circumstances. First, I will be dealing with the material notions of region and class that distinguished the defendants of both cases, and how these played a role in the respective judgments. Following this assessment, I will take a look at the abstract nature of the charges themselves that would lead to disparity in the judgments arrived by the courts. These circumstances represent the fundamental causalities that explain this rift in judicial decision making. The class distinctions between defendants played a significant role in the disparity for the judicial outcomes of these very similar criminal cases.