Yes, Jury Selection Is as Racist as You Think. Now We Have Proof.

[SummerMadness]

Yes, Jury Selection Is as Racist as You Think. Now We Have Proof.

Race, as a matter of constitutional principle, cannot factor into the selection of jurors for criminal trials. But in the American justice system, anyone with a bit of common sense and a view from the back of the courtroom knows the colorblind ideal isn’t true in practice.

Racial bias largely seeps in through what's called "peremptory" challenges: the ability of a prosecutor — and then a defense attorney — to block a certain number of potential jurors without needing to give the court any reason for the exclusion.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yes, Jury Selection Is as Racist as You Think. Now We Have Proof.

Not a whole lot different than College admittance selection.

 

[dogs4thewin]

There will always be racism in this fallen world. There always has been and there always will be.

 

[Radagast]

Yes, Jury Selection Is as Racist as You Think. Now We Have Proof.

The defence wants to put in a jury biased in favour of the defendant, and avoid anyone who might be biased against the defendant.

Shall we make every jury population-balanced: 7 non-Hispanic white, 2 Hispanic white, 2 black, and 1 Asian? Would that make you happy?

 

[Aldebaran]

There will always be racism in this fallen world. There always has been and there always will be.

Just as their will always be favoritism of some kind in every situation. Otherwise, we'd all have the same fortune, the same opportunity, the same outcome in life.

 

[dysert]

Just as their will always be favoritism of some kind in every situation. Otherwise, we'd all have the same fortune, the same opportunity, the same outcome in life.

And I was always taught (and experience has reinforced it) that life isn't fair. You might as well whine because the sun always rises in the east.

 

[Silmarien]

I'm not sure that there's any part of the criminal system that isn't charged with racial issues. The really big one is racial bias in sentencing.

 

[SummerMadness]

I haven't seen anybody make any comments about the reforms they have proposed, do you think they are adequate or helpful to criminal justice reform?

 

[Radagast]

I haven't seen anybody make any comments about the reforms they have proposed, do you think they are adequate or helpful to criminal justice reform?

Sorry, I'm not going to shell out money just so I can read an article that you're excited about.

 

[Nithavela]

Sorry, I'm not going to shell out money just so I can read an article that you're excited about.

To summarise, the two suggested reforms are

1: Forbid eliminating jurors for issues closely related to race, like living in a high crime neighbourhood

and 2: making information about jury selection easily accessible in a searchable database (currently those informations are accessible by the public, but buried in offline case notes).

 

[Silmarien]

I haven't seen anybody make any comments about the reforms they have proposed, do you think they are adequate or helpful to criminal justice reform?

I think that the first proposal--outlawing peremptory challenges defended with explanations highly correlated with race--is likely to be helpful, but I don't expect to be able to get that passed in the states where it is most necessary.

I'm more cynical about simply publishing information on jury selection, though. Too few voters are likely to check up on information like that before just voting on party lines for it to really make a difference.

 

[Nithavela]

I think that the first proposal--outlawing peremptory challenges defended with explanations highly correlated with race--is likely to be helpful, but I don't expect to be able to get that passed in the states where it is most necessary.

I'm more cynical about simply publishing information on jury selection, though. Too few voters are likely to check up on information like that before just voting on party lines for it to really make a difference.

It might improve voter turnout for those elections, though.

 

[expos4ever]

Is that all you see is racism? Every thread is about racism. Dont you see any good in people as well as evil?

In defence of the poster, racism is one of the most pernicious, persistent cancers that affects humanity. Just look at what is going on in the USA right now. Donald Trump has tapped into a powerful undercurrent of racism that still infects the USA.

Racism is perhaps bred into our very DNA, although that is by no means an excuse for tolerating it.

 

[Silmarien]

It might improve voter turnout for those elections, though.

I really doubt it. Regularly paying attention to jury selection statistics is a lot more difficult than getting out to vote. Anyone who is that politically engaged is going to be voting one way or the other.

Of course, progressive organizations could try to use these statistics to campaign and motivate people to vote, but I'm not sure that it's high enough on the list of people's priorities to really work (again, unless they're already engaged). And I wouldn't expect it to make an actual difference in the way criminal proceedings go in conservative states.

 

[Nithavela]

I really doubt it. Regularly paying attention to jury selection statistics is a lot more difficult than getting out to vote. Anyone who is that politically engaged is going to be voting one way or the other.

Of course, progressive organizations could try to use these statistics to campaign and motivate people to vote, but I'm not sure that it's high enough on the list of people's priorities to really work (again, unless they're already engaged). And I wouldn't expect it to make an actual difference in the way criminal proceedings go in conservative states.

I also have my doubts, but sorting this information might still be worth it for various reasons.

 

[Silmarien]

I also have my doubts, but sorting this information might still be worth it for various reasons.

Yeah, access to information is always good, but I don't think criminal justice reform is the type of thing where public pressure could help. We need legislation.

 

[Hank77]

To summarise, the two suggested reforms are

1: Forbid eliminating jurors for issues closely related to race, like living in a high crime neighbourhood

and 2: making information about jury selection easily accessible in a searchable database (currently those informations are accessible by the public, but buried in offline case notes).

I'm against both of these suggestions.

 

[SummerMadness]

Sorry, I'm not going to shell out money just so I can read an article that you're excited about.

There are many options for reading this article for free. If one wishes to not read the article yet advance an argument despite ignorance of the article's content, I don't there is much reason to consider any of your complaints.

Yeah, access to information is always good, but I don't think criminal justice reform is the type of thing where public pressure could help. We need legislation.

I think posting the information is less related to whether general voters will access the database as much as concerned voters and advocacy groups accessing the database. One of the points they make in the article is the fact that all this information is available, but the ability to access that information is cumbersome. As a consequence, groups that may seek to advance criminal justice reform do not have the information to get voters to support one candidate over the other.

I can imagine a prosecutor that follows this behavior of routinely eliminating racial minorities from juries and someone running on a platform of reform calling out this behavior. Larry Krasner, the DA of Philadelphia, is someone that is a great example of criminal justice reform, but arming voters with more information about DA's that do not work in their interest helps.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I also have my doubts, but sorting this information might still be worth it for various reasons.

I don't understand why making "jury information" accessible to the public would make the juries themselves more....equitable? What exactly is it supposed to effect?

I don't actually understand what it is that's being claimed to be racist here (I also can't read the article).

 

[bhsmte]

There is all kinds of prejudice in jury selection. Each attorney gets the opportunity to knock certain people out and do so based on what they think is best for their client.