Civil and Human Rights

With Supreme Court’s Blueford Decision, A Sad Day For Constitution

Washington, DC – On news today that the Supreme Court handed down a 6-3 decision in Blueford v. State of Arkansas – a major double jeopardy case in which a jury unanimously had said a criminal defendant was not guilty of murder – Constitutional Accountability Center released the following statement:

CAC President Doug Kendall said, “I don’t know how you declare yourself to be an ‘originalist’ and find double jeopardy not to attach in this case.  As Justice Sotomayor explained, the facts of this case are precisely why the Founders added the Double Jeopardy clause to our Bill of Rights.  It’s a sad day for the Constitution’s text and history.”

CAC Chief Counsel Elizabeth Wydra said, “As the only former trial court judge on the Supreme Court bench, Justice Sotomayor knows well the threat to individual freedom from giving the prosecution two bites at the apple.”



CAC’s “friend of the court” brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in Blueford v. Arkansas

CAC’s Text and History Blog: “Double Jeopardy and the Protection of Trial By Jury: Supreme Court To Hear Oral Argument in Blueford v. Arkansas,” February 17, 2012:

Supreme Court opinion in Blueford v. Arkansas:


Constitutional Accountability Center ( is a think tank, public interest law firm, and action center dedicated to fulfilling the progressive promise of the Constitution’s text and history.


More from Civil and Human Rights

Corporate Accountability

Intuit, Inc. v. Federal Trade Commission

In Intuit Inc v. Federal Trade Commission, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is considering whether the FTC’s authority to issue cease-and-desist orders against false and misleading advertising is constitutional.
Rule of Law
June 20, 2024

Opinion | The tragedy of the Supreme Court’s bump stock ruling

Washington Post
Don’t let technicalities, or a refusal to use common sense, become the enemy of public...
By: Nina Henry
Access to Justice
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court rejects artificial limit on liability for speech-based retaliation by government officers

WASHINGTON, DC – Following today’s Supreme Court decision in Gonzalez v. Trevino, a case in...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Civil and Human Rights
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: Supreme Court decision keeps the door open to accountability for police officers who make false charges

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Chiaverini v. City...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Corporate Accountability
June 20, 2024

RELEASE: In narrow ruling, Supreme Court rejects baseless effort to shield corporate-derived income from taxation

WASHINGTON, DC – Following this morning’s decision at the Supreme Court in Moore v. United...
By: Brian R. Frazelle
Rule of Law
June 19, 2024

The Supreme Court’s approach on ‘history and tradition’ is irking Amy Coney Barrett

Washington (CNN) — On a Supreme Court where the conservative supermajority increasingly leans on history as a...
By: Elizabeth B. Wydra, Devan Cole, John Fritze