See 590 U.S. 83 at 90 (2020) "Wherever we might look to determine what the term “trial by an impartial jury” meant at the time of the Sixth Amendment's adoption—whether it's the common law, state practices in the founding era, or opinions and treatises written soon afterward—the answer is unmistakable.

[2][4] The present case's petitioner, Evangelisto Ramos, had been convicted of murder in Louisiana on a 10–2 vote in 2016, before the passage of the new constitutional amendment.

[9] Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion, joined in parts by justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor, Stephen Breyer, and Brett Kavanaugh, which holds that the guarantee is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Justice Clarence Thomas joined in the judgment only, arguing instead that it is incorporated by the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

[2][9] The majority opinion in Ramos v. Louisiana considered whether prisoners may seek collateral review to challenge non-unanimous convictions, but declined to decide the issue.

[14] Subsequently, the Oregon Supreme Court ruled in December 2022 that the Ramos decision should be applied retroactively to cases within the state.