No Room for Bigotry in the Legal System

SJC Affirms That There is No Room for Bigotry in the Legal System

Attorneys Cannot Be Zealous Advocates When They Harbor Racist and Islamophobic Beliefs About Their Client

In a groundbreaking opinion examining the role of bias in the judicial system, Massachusetts’ highest court has concluded that a Black Muslim man’s right to counsel was violated when he was represented by a racist and Islamophobic attorney. In Commonwealth v. Anthony Dew (No. SJC-13356), the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) held that animus constitutes an inherent conflict of interest, thus entitling the defendants to a new trial. 

In February 2016, the state appointed Richard Doyle (now deceased) to represent Mr. Anthony Dew, and he did so until a guilty plea in June 2016. Unbeknownst to Mr. Dew, by that point, Doyle had spent years publicly expressing unabashed racist and Islamophobic views on social media. Doyle’s bigoted social media activities included:

• a post stating, “In Islam, you have to die for Allah. The God I worship died for me”; and
  
• two photographs, one depicting Black men posing with guns captioned, “Don’t glorify shooting people,” and the other showing distraught Black men captioned, “Then cry like a bitch when someone you love gets shot.”

Years later, after Doyle’s horrific posts came to light, Mr. Dew moved for a new trial, arguing that an attorney who spews hateful racist and Islamophobic vitriol cannot competently represent a Black Muslim client.  After the Superior Court denied his motion, the SJC agreed to review the matter.

Today’s opinion affirms arguments made by Lawyers for Civil Rights (LCR) and Foley & Lardner LLP in an amicus brief filed on behalf of:

• Council on American-Islamic Relations–Massachusetts (CAIR-MA)
  
• Muslim Justice League (MJL)
  
• Massachusetts Black Woman Attorneys (MBWA)
  
• Hispanic National Bar Association (HNBA)
  
• Prisoners’ Legal Services of Massachusetts (PLS) 
  
• Massachusetts Law Reform Institute (MLRI) 
  
• Justice Resource Institute (JRI)
  
• Citizens for Juvenile Justice (CfJJ)

Our amicus brief argued that Mr. Dew should not have to bear the burden of proving his right to counsel was violated. The Court agreed, stating “the defendant need not engage in “a speculative inquiry into what might have occurred in an alternate universe” had he been appointed unbiased counsel.”

“The SJC’s ruling today solidifies the Court’s commitment to rectifying the persistent stench of racism and prejudice in our society. Bigotry has no place in our judicial system,” said Mirian Albert, Staff Attorney of LCR. 

“Justice was served today for Mr. Dew. This is also a triumph towards rebuilding trust between communities of color and the criminal legal system,” said Oren Sellstrom, Litigation Director of LCR.

The opinion is available here. 

SJC-13356_Slip_Opinion