The N.C. House Appropriations Committee is now considering the "Racial Justice Act," previously passed by the Senate. The bill is "an effort to ensure race isn't a factor in any death penalty case." It would allow "those on death row to argue race played a role in their death sentence or someone accused of capital murder in a prosecutor's decision to seek the death penalty." This is a solution in search of a problem; that right has always been available.

It is true that North Carolina has a sad history of discrimination against African-Americans; 91 African-Americans and only 28 whites were executed from 1941-61. Since then, only 13 African-Americans and 28 whites have been executed, a complete reversal from previous years.

A different sort of racial discrimination is now asserted -- that murderers of African-Americans are LESS likely to get the death penalty than murderers of whites. This claim was first made in 1983 on behalf of John Rook, a white man who brutally raped and murdered a white woman. Astonishingly, his attorneys argued that the death penalty was discriminatory and that he would have been less likely to get the death penalty had he raped and murdered an African-American woman. This argument is now turned on its head, asserting discrimination against African-Americans because African-American life is undervalued. Since over 90 percent of the murderers of African-Americans are African-American themselves, the apparent remedy would be to execute more African-American murderers.

It is often asserted (with little evidence) that African-Americans who murder whites are more likely to be executed than whites who murders African-Americans. It is very rare for a white to murder an African-American, and inter-racial murders tend to be particularly aggravated, making the death penalty more likely. Of those eligible for the death penalty, about eight times as many African-Americans murder whites as whites murder African-Americans.

The Racial Justice Act is unnecessary since claims of racial discriminations can be made in court without the act. Such a claim was recently made in Durham in the case of Keith Kidwell, charged with murdering a store clerk during a robbery. Based on a new study by UNC political science professor Isaac Unah, it was argued that "prosecutors are six times more likely ... to seek capital punishment when a black suspect has been accused of killing a white person compared with when the victim is black."

The analysis is so flawed as to be utterly worthless. Few of the defendants were even eligible for the death penalty and there was no information about the nature of aggravating circumstances, the importance of which Dr. Unah has acknowledged in a previous paper. Ironically, in 2003 Dr. Unah stated that "local prosecutors in the South, who once made race-conscious decisions concerning whom to prosecute for the death penalty, now appear race-neutral."

Dr. Unah is well known for a widely publicized 2001 paper alleging discrimination in the death penalty. In a press conference that year, it was reported that "the study's critics are welcome to review the data," but the data have never been made available, despite many requests. I do not believe that there is a shred of evidence that there is racial discrimination in the death penalty. Certainly this act will encourage more litigation with false claims of discrimination, enriching lawyers and statistical consultants like me. This act serves no useful purpose.

Elliot Cramer lives in Chapel Hill.