Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


A Jury of Your Peers?: The Lack of Protection for the Sixth Amendment

4/4/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
By Cary Holley

Cary Holley is a freshman at the University of Pennsylvania studying Political Science.

The Sixth Amendment of our Constitution guarantees a right that is essential for justice: an impartial jury. [1] However, this principle is still not guaranteed to all. The legal precedents that appear to  protect this right leave loopholes in which discrimination can persist. As a result,  some Americans today are not truly granted a jury of their peers.

The jury selection process is at the heart of ensuring one’s right to an impartial jury. During this process counsel has the ability to strike (i.e. remove from the jury) any juror who they believe will not be able to judge the case fairly for whatever reason. [2] This almost unchecked capability, known as the peremptory challenge, has historically been a potent weapon for perpetuating injustice. [3] This power has luckily been limited, albeit slightly, by legal precedents.

In 1985 the U.S. Supreme Court heard a case in which a prosecutor struck four black people from the jury, resulting in an all-white jury. In this famous case, Batson v. Kentucky, the Court ruled that the prosecutor’s actions violated the Fourteenth and Sixth amendments. Furthermore, they set a very important precedent: a prosecutor must be able to give a “neutral” reason for removing jurors. [4] Although this appears to be a step in the right direction, it is fundamental to notice the language. Essentially, as long as a prosecutor can come up with a race neutral reason the Sixth and Fourteenth amendments are not considered to be violated. And, as a case that occurred ten years will soon demonstrate, almost any reason will do.

If Batson v. Kentucky was a step forward in curbing the further marginalization of minority groups in the criminal justice system, Purkett v. Elem in 1995 was a step back. This case was yet another example of a prosecutor striking the black people from a jury. One may wonder, what were the prosecutor’s race neutral reasons for their strikes? Here is one example: “. . . He had long hair hanging down shoulder length, curly, unkempt hair. . .” [5] While this explanation seems ridiculous to say the least, the Supreme Court allowed it. Moreover, they set the precedent that any neutral explanation, even if it is “silly or superstitious,” is enough to rebut a claim of discrimination. [5] However, in a recent case called Foster v. Chatham, the Supreme Court challenged such explanations.

In 1986, Timothy Foster was the defendant in a death-penalty trial in Georgia. The prosecution in this case struck the only black jurors. [6] At the trial’s end, Foster was found guilty and sentenced to death. He requested the prosecution’s jury selection notes but was denied. Eventually, through the Georgia Open Records Act, the notes were finally released and the case worked its way up to the U.S. Supreme Court. [6] The notes, as one may have guessed, revealed a clear bias: the black jurors’ names were marked and highlighted. [7] When the prosecutors gave rather illogical, race neutral reasons (i.e. that a 34-year-old black juror was too young) in an effort to comply with the Batson rule, Chief Justice Roberts dismissed the explanations as “nonsense” and “pretextual.” [7] In a 7-1 decision, with Justice Thomas dissenting, the Court ruled in Foster’s favor and declared that he had been unfairly subjected to discrimination.

Luckily justice was served in this case. Nevertheless, it is essential that this triumph does not distract from the fact that current protections against discriminatory jury selection are inadequate. The “silly or superstitious” ruling from Purkett leaves substantial room for prejudice in the criminal justice system. Moreover, the Foster decision isn’t very reassuring because not everyone can get a hold of incriminating notes from the prosecution. Perhaps without them, the end result in Foster’s case would have looked more like the result in Elem’s. Thus, until thorough legislation is created and precedents leave less room for injustice, having a jury of one’s peers will continue to be a privilege only afforded to some.

[1] “Trial by a Jury of One’s Peers Law and Legal Definition.” US Legal. Accessed March 21, 2017. https://definitions.uslegal.com/t/trial-by-a-jury-of-ones-peers/
[2] Staff, LII. “Peremptory challenge.” Legal Information Institute. September 21, 2009. Accessed March 21, 2017. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/peremptory_challenge
[3] “Illegal Racial Discrimination in Jury Selection: A Continuing Legacy.” The Equal Justice Initiative. Accessed March 21, 2017. http://eji.org/reports/illegal-racial-discrimination-in-jury-selection
[4] “Batson v. Kentucky.” Oyez. Accessed March 21, 2017. https://www.oyez.org/cases/1985/84-6263
[5] “Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (1995).” Legal Information Institute. Accessed March 21, 2017. https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-802.ZPC.html
[6] “Foster v. Chatham.” Oyez. 2016. Accessed March 21, 2017. https://www.oyez.org/cases/2015/14-8349
[7] Liptak, Alan. “Supreme Court Finds Racial Bias in Jury Selection for Death Penalty Case.” The New York Times. May 23, 2016. Accessed March 21, 2017. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/24/us/supreme-court-black-jurors-death-penalty-georgia.html

The opinions and views expressed through this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.

0 Comments

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    Categories

    All
    Aaron Tsui
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Bess
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alexandra Kanan
    Alexandra Kerrigan
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Augustin
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Kalishman
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Amanda Damayanti
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Arshiya Pant
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Audrey Pan
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Catherine Tang
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    David Katz
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Dhilan Lavu
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Ella Jewell
    Ella Sohn
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabrielle Cohen
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Haley Son
    Hannah Steinberg
    Harshit Rai
    Hennessis Umacta
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Ingrid Holmquist
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jack Burgess
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Joe Anderson
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Kanishka Bhukya
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Khlood Awan
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyan Casamalhuapa
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Michael Merolla
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nathan Liu
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nicole Patel
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Paula Vekker
    Pheby Liu
    Pragat Patel
    Rachel Bina
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sajan Srivastava
    Samantha Graines
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Serena Camici
    Shahana Banerjee
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Parthasarathy
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Tyler Ringhofer
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Vishwajeet Deshmukh
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    September 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    May 2023
    March 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    September 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.