Pitts v. Mississippi
View Official PDFBelow are plain-language sections to help you understand what the Court decided in Pitts v. Mississippi and why it matters. Quotes are taken from the syllabus (the Court’s short summary at the start of the opinion).
Summary
A short, plain-English overview of Pitts v. Mississippi.
The Supreme Court reversed the Mississippi Supreme Court's decision, emphasizing the necessity of a case-specific finding before denying a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to face-to-face confrontation. The case involved a Mississippi statute mandating the use of a screen for child witnesses, which the Court found insufficient without specific evidence of necessity. The Court highlighted that state statutes cannot override constitutional rights.
Holding
The single most important “bottom line” of what the Court decided in Pitts v. Mississippi.
The Court held that the Mississippi Supreme Court erred by not requiring a case-specific finding of necessity before allowing the use of a screen for a child witness.
Constitutional Concepts
These are the Constitution-related themes that appear in Pitts v. Mississippi. Click a concept to see other cases that involve the same idea.
-
Why Confrontation of Witnesses is relevant to Pitts v. Mississippi
The case revolves around the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause and the requirement for a case-specific finding of necessity before denying face-to-face confrontation.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Ordinarily, the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause 'guarantees the defendant a face-to-face meeting with witnesses appearing before the trier of fact.'
-
Why Preemption is relevant to Pitts v. Mississippi
The case involves a conflict between a state statute and the Federal Constitution, with the latter taking precedence.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)When state law conflicts with the Federal Constitution, the latter controls.
-
Why Procedural Due Process is relevant to Pitts v. Mississippi
The case discusses the requirement for a court to 'hear evidence' and make a 'case-specific' finding, implicating procedural fairness.
Syllabus excerpt (verbatim)Instead, the Sixth Amendment tolerates screening in child-abuse cases only if a court 'hear[s] evidence' and issues a 'case-specific' finding of '[t]he requisite . . . necessity.'
Key Quotes
Short excerpts from the syllabus in Pitts v. Mississippi that support the summary and concepts above.
The Sixth Amendment tolerates screening in child-abuse cases only if a court 'hear[s] evidence' and issues a 'case-specific' finding of '[t]he requisite . . . necessity.'
When state law conflicts with the Federal Constitution, the latter controls.
A trial court may not deny a defendant his Sixth Amendment right to meet his accusers face to face simply because a state statute permits screening.
