 Witt’s argument was that jurors, who wouldn’t automatically vote not guilty on the death penalty, still were forced to step down simply because they didn’t like the death penalty and were more likely to vote not guilty.This, he argued, was a violation of his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights.The Court found that Witt’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were not violated by the "voir dire" process that took place before the trial began.