An attorney might utilize peremptory challenges for various reasons, including:
1. Removing a potential juror based on race: Although it is illegal to exclude a juror solely based on their race, attorneys may still attempt to use peremptory challenges in a discriminatory manner. They might have racial biases or stereotypes that they believe could influence a juror's decision-making.
2. Removing a potential juror based on residence in the community: Attorneys may want to exclude jurors who have close ties to the community where the trial is taking place. They might fear that these jurors could be biased in favor of their opponent or have preconceived notions about the case due to their familiarity with the local environment.
3. Removing a potential juror based on gender: Attorneys might want to eliminate jurors of a specific gender if they believe that their client would be advantaged or disadvantaged by having more jurors of their client's gender. They may speculate that jurors of a particular gender might better understand or sympathize with their client's perspective.
4. Removing a potential juror who exhibits prejudice or bias: Attorneys have the right to challenge potential jurors who display clear signs of prejudice or bias that could impair their ability to render a fair and impartial verdict. This could include jurors who have expressed strong opinions about the case or have affiliations that suggest a bias.
However, it's important to note that the use of peremptory challenges to remove potential jurors based on race and gender has been deemed unconstitutional and violates the principle of equal protection under the law. Nonetheless, attorneys may still attempt to do so covertly.
Why might an attorney utilize peremptory challenges
to remove a potential juror based on race
to remove a potential juror based on their residence in the commmunity
to remove a potential juror based on gender
to remove a potential juror who exhibits prejudice or bias
1 answer