Ham v. South Carolina
409 U.S. 524 · Decided January 17, 1973 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Ham v. South Carolina was decided on January 17, 1973 by a vote of 7–2. The Court reversed the lower court's decision. Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Extra-legal jury influences, voir dire” in the Criminal Procedure area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 409 U.S. 524 · 93 S. Ct. 848 · 35 L. Ed. 2d 46 · 1973 U.S. LEXIS 115
- Docket number
- 71-5139
- Decided
- January 17, 1973
- Argued
- November 6, 1972
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party received a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 7–2
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Extra-legal jury influences, voir dire
- Issue area
- Criminal Procedure
- Legal provision
- Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Type of law
- Constitutional amendment
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William O. Douglas | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Majority | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Ham v. South Carolina
SCDB identifiers: case 1972-041, docket 1972-041-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Extra-legal jury influences, voir dire”
- Ristaino v. Ross
- Rosales-Lopez v. United States
- Turner v. Murray
- Holland v. Illinois
- Dawud Majid Mu'min v. Virginia
- Michael Rivera v. Illinois
Cases on the same legal provision: Fourteenth Amendment (due process)
- Roe v. WadeLaw held unconstitutional
- Doe v. BoltonLaw held unconstitutional
- Ortwein v. Schwab
- Ward v. Village of MonroevilleLaw held unconstitutional
- Robinson v. HanrahanLaw held unconstitutional
- Douglas v. Buder
Same Term, same area (Criminal Procedure)
- Murch v. Mottram
- Webb v. Texas
- Cool v. United States
- Neil v. Biggers
- Swenson v. Stidham
- One Lot Emerald Cut Stones and One Ring v. United States
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error