Race and the Jury: How the Law is Keeping Minorities off the Jury
Stephanie Adamakos
Abstract
Open-access reader
Stephanie Adamakos
Abstract
Open-access reader
The modern jury focuses on three main ideas: impartiality, as laid out in the Sixth Amendment, jury of one’s peers, stemming from the Magna Carta, and a jury that represents a fair cross-section of the community. The cross-section idea has been developed by case law, but originates from the Sixth Amendment, under the belief that jury selection that does not systematically discriminate against members of the community and has a jury pool represents a cross-section of the community is likely to be impartial. Jurors are likely to draw upon their own experiences when deliberating, so having a variety of experiences and perspectives can make for a more well-balanced discussion. An additional hope is that when selecting from a cross-section, it makes the jury more representative of the community and increases the legitimacy of the jury. However, just because the jury pool may represent a cross-section of the community, the final jury may not.
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The modern jury focuses on three main ideas: impartiality, as laid out in the Sixth Amendment, jury of one’s peers, stemming from the Magna Carta, and a jury that represents a fair cross-section of the community. The cross-section idea has been developed by case law, but originates from the Sixth Amendment, under the belief that jury selection that does not systematically discriminate against members of the community and has a jury pool represents a cross-section of the community is likely to be impartial. Jurors are likely to draw upon their own experiences when deliberating, so having a variety of experiences and perspectives can make for a more well-balanced discussion. An additional hope is that when selecting from a cross-section, it makes the jury more representative of the community and increases the legitimacy of the jury. However, just because the jury pool may represent a cross-section of the community, the final jury may not.
Key concepts: Jury, Hung jury, Race (biology), Law, Jury selection, Political science, Criminology, Sociology