Document: 476 U.S. 79 106 S.Ct. 1712 90 L.Ed.2d 69 James Kirkland BATSON, Petitioner,v.KENTUCKY. No. 84-6263. Argued Dec. 12, 1985. Decided April 30, 1986. Syllabus During the criminal trial in a Kentucky state court of petitioner, black man, judge conducted voir dire examination jury venire and excused certain jurors for cause. The prosecutor then used his peremptory challenges to strike all four persons on venire, composed only white was selected. Defense counsel moved discharge ground that prosecutor's removal veniremen violated petitioner's rights under Sixth Fourteenth Amendments drawn from cross section community, Amendment equal protection laws. Without expressly ruling request hearing, denied motion, ultimately convicted petitioner. Affirming conviction, Supreme Court observed recently, another case, it had relied Swain v. Alabama, 380 202, 85 824, 13 759, held defendant alleging lack fair must demonstrate systematic exclusion group venire. Held: 1. principle announced Strauder West Virginia, 10 Otto 303, 100 25 L.Ed. 664, State denies when puts him before which members race have been purposefully excluded, is reaffirmed. Pp. 84-89. (a) A has no right petit whole or part own race. 305, 664. However, Equal Protection Clause guarantees will not exclude account race, false assumption as are qualified serve jurors. By denying person participation service also unconstitutionally discriminates against excluded juror. Moreover, selection procedures juries undermine public confidence fairness our system justice. 85-88. (b) same principles applied determine whether there discrimination selecting govern State's use individual jury. Although ordinarily entitled exercise any reason, long reason related view concerning outcome case be tried, forbids challenge potential solely their unable impartially consider defendant. 88-89. 2. portion supra, evidentiary burden placed who claims he through discriminatory rejected. In Swain, could make out prima facie purposeful proof being perverted. Evidence offered by did meet standard because circumstances prosecutors jurisdiction were responsible striking beyond facts defendant's case. This formulation inconsistent with standards subsequently developed decisions relating may showing racial relying its 89-96. 3. establish evidence at trial. first show member cognizable group, exercised remove rely fact constitute practice permits those discriminate mind discriminate. Finally, such other relevant raise an inference Once makes showing, shifts come forward neutral explanation challenging rebut stating challenged they would partial shared affirming good faith selections. 96-98. 4. While occupies important position procedures, above-stated contribution generally administration Nor application create serious administrative difficulties. 98-99. 5. Because here flatly rejected objection without requiring explain action, remanded further proceedings. 100. Reversed remanded. POWELL, J., delivered opinion Court, BRENNAN, WHITE, MARSHALL, BLACKMUN, STEVENS, O'CONNOR, JJ., joined. WHITE filed concurring opinions, post, p. 100, 102. opinion, joined, 108. 111. BURGER, C.J., dissenting REHNQUIST, 112. 134. J. David Niehaus, Louisville, Ky., Rickie L. Pearson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, respondent. Lawrence G. Wallace, Washington, D.C., United States, amicus curiae, support respondent special leave Court. Justice POWELL 1 requires us reexamine 759 (1965), jury.1 2 * Petitioner, indicted charges second-degree burglary receipt stolen goods. On day Jefferson Circuit cause, permitted parties challenges.2 sworn Counsel requested hearing motion. "strike anybody want to." reasoning cross-section requirement applies itself. 3 petitioner both counts. appeal Kentucky, pressed, among claims, argument challenges. Conceding apparently foreclosed claim based conduct this urged follow People Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258, 148 Cal.Rptr. 890, 583 P.2d 748 (1978); Commonwealth Soares, 377 Mass. 461, 387 N.E.2d 499, cert. denied, 444 881, 170, 62 110 (1979), hold § 11 Constitution community. Petitioner contended showed engaged "pattern" established violation Swain. 4 affirmed. single paragraph, declined invitation adopt supra. recently reaffirmed reliance See McFerron, 680 S.W.2d 924 (1984). We granted certiorari, 471 1052, 105 2111, (1985), now reverse. II 5 recognized "State's deliberate denial Negroes justice violates Clause." U.S., 203-204, S.Ct., 826-27. "consistently repeatedly" reaffirmed, id., 204, 827, numerous preceding following Swain.3 reaffirm today.4 6 More than century ago, decided laws excluded. 664 (1880). That decision laid foundation Court's unceasing efforts eradicate select drawn. Strauder, explained central concern ratified put end governmental Id., 306-307. Exclusion citizens constitutes primary example evil designed cure. 7 holding offends Clause, recognized, however, "petit race." 305.5 "The number races nationalities stands way evolution conception" demand protection. Akins Texas, 325 398, 403, 65 1276, 1279, 89 1692 (1945).6 But does tried whose selected pursuant nondiscriminatory criteria. Martin 200 316, 321, 26 338, 339, 50 497 (1906); Ex parte 345, 676 345 305,7 jurors, see Norris 294 587, 599, 55 579, 584, 1074 (1935); Neal Delaware, 370, 397, 103 567 (1881). 8 Purposeful intended secure. very idea body . peers equals summoned determine; is, neighbors, fellows, associates, having legal status society holds." 308; Carter Jury Comm'n Greene County, 396 320, 330, 518, 524, 24 549 (1970). occupied safeguarding accused crime arbitrary power judge. Duncan Louisiana, 391 145, 156, 88 1444, 1451, 20 491 (1968).8 Those "indifferently chosen,"9 secure "protection life liberty color prejudice." 309. 9 Racial harms try. Competence juror depends assessment qualifications ability presented Thiel Southern Pacific Co., 328 217, 223-224, 66 984, 987-88, 1181 (1946). person's simply "is unrelated fitness juror." 227, 989 (Frankfurter, dissenting). As ago therefore, discriminated 329-330, 523-524; 386. harm extends inflicted touch entire Selection Ballard 329 187, 195, 67 261, 265, 91 181 (1946); McCray New York, 461 961, 968, 2438, 2443, 77 1322 (1983) (MARSHALL, certiorari). Discrimination within judicial most pernicious "a stimulant prejudice impediment securing [black citizens] law aims others." 308. B invalidated statute provided men 305. can confident law. requires, we look face defining practices afford action officers effecting prohibited discrimination." 589, 580, 1074; Hernandez 347 475, 478-479, 74 667, 670-71, 98 866 (1954); 346-347. Thus, found where implementing operated grounds,10 made clear prohibits forms jurors.11 concerned largely during forbid Since protects throughout proceedings bringing justice, Hill 316 400, 406, 1159, 1162, 86 1559 (1942), draw up lists but resort "other stages process," Avery Georgia, 559, 562, 73 891, 893, 97 1244 (1953); 965, 2440, 2443 certiorari); Alexander 405 625, 632, 92 1221, 1226, 31 536 (1972). 12 Accordingly, component process issue here, privilege challenges, subject commands Clause.12 "for all, outcome" States Robinson, 421 F.Supp. 467, 473 (Conn.1976), mandamus sub nom. Newman, F.2d 240 (CA2 1977), III never questioned subsequent Rather, called upon repeatedly review particular facts.13 recurring question these cases, met proving State. Whitus 385 545, 550, 87 643, 646-647, 17 599 (1967); 478-481, 670-672; 403-404, 1279; (1906). heart Alabama today.14 14 required decide, issues, 209-210, 830. record six included 210, rejecting failure prove discrimination, nonetheless indicated some limits 222-224, 837-838. 15 sought accommodate historical free control, 214-220, 832-836, constitutional prohibition confer 219, 835 (citing Stilson 250 583, 586, 40 28, 29-30, 63 1154 (1919)), traditionally viewed one means assuring unbiased jury, 835.15 To preserve nature challenge, scrutinize actions presumption properly 221-222, 836-837. 16 went observe, contravention Clause. It impermissible blacks reasons wholly trial" deny "the opportunity participate enjoyed population." 224, 838. "being perverted" manner. Ibid. For example, raised prosecutor, "in after whatever circumstances, whoever victim be, commissioners survived result ever juries." 223, 837. standard. strikes 224-228, 838-840. lower courts teaching reasoned repeated over cases necessary Clause.16 interpretation defendants crippling proof,17 prosecutors' immune scrutiny. follow, reject since assessing 18 reflect general "invidious quality" claimed racially "must traced purpose." Washington Davis, 426 229, 240, 96 2040, 2048, 48 597 (1976). "burden course," alleges "to existence 646-47 Tarrance Florida, 188 519, 23 402, 47 572 (1903)). deciding if carried persuasion, undertake sensitive inquiry into circumstantial direct intent available." Arlington Heights Metropolitan Housing Development Corp., 429 252, 266, 555, 564, 450 (1977). Circumstantial invidious include disproportionate impact. 242, 2049. impact "may practical purposes unconstitutionality various difficult nonracial grounds." "total seriously venires," ibid., itself 'unequal intentional discrimination,' " 241, 2048 (quoting 404, 1279). 19 impermissibly totality gives rise purpose. 239-242, 2047-49. requisite adequately exclusion. 1226. cannot mere assertions officials performed official duties. 1226; Jones 389 24, 25, 4, 5, (1967). "permissible criteria produced monochromatic result." 2048.18 discerned decisions. E.g., Castaneda Partida, 430 482, 494-495, 1272, 1280, 51 498 (1977); 631-632, 1225-1226. initially capable singled differential treatment. 494, 1280. combination evidence, extended period time. Proof raises "result bespeaks 672-73; 564. 21 ultimate ways long-continued unexplained absence" "from many panels." Cassell 339 282, 290, 70 629, 633, 94 839 (1950) (plurality opinion). involving substantially underrepresented drawn, providing 552, 647; 1280; 2048; 629-631, 1224-26. factors attribute chance absence array mechanism abuse. When suggest need, "factual inquiry" "takes possible explanatory factors" 630, 1225. These accordance proposition, articulated Department consistent pattern discrimination" predicate invidiously act" "immunized making comparable decisions." n. 14, 14. requirements dictate "several suffer object, 2440 certiorari), promise all.19 C context fully 241-242, 2048-2049; 1224-1226. conclusion Second, fact, dispute, "those discriminate." 892. empaneling discrimination. should circumstances. might give Similarly, questions statements exercising refute examples merely illustrative. judges, experienced supervising dire, able decide creates Though imposes limitation full character historic emphasize need level justifying Abrams, 750 F.2d, 1132; Booker Jabe, 775 762, 773 (CA6 1985), pending, 85-1028. assumption—or intuitive judgment—that Cf. 598-599, 583-84; Thompson 469 1024, 1026, 443, 445, 83 369 (1984) (BRENNAN, Just unqualified 86, so biased black. core guarantee protection, ensuring meaningless approve basis assumptions, arise jurors' motive "affirm[ing] [his] selections." If accepted rebutting "would vain illusory requirement." 598, 583-84. therefore articulate tried.20 duty discrimination.21 IV contends eviscerate values served challenge. strictures argues unfettered vital importance system. 27 recognize, course, do agree today reality practice, amply reflected state- federal-court shows unfortunately times been, enforces mandate furthers ends justice.22 heterogeneous population Nation, respect rule strengthened ensure citizen disqualified 28 persuaded suggestion applying version recognize today, burdens,23 survived. decline, formulate followed timely challenges.24 V 29 remand decides establish, facie, precedents require conviction reversed. 549-550, 646-47; 672-673; Patton Mississippi, 332 469, 68 187.25 30 ordered. concurring. 32 overturns principal given using panel presumed acting legitimate trial-related reasons. rules may, necessarily, inference, carries refuting, belief satisfactory fairly try 33 I that, extent, overruled. legitimacy overcome time prosecution consistently juries.* warned peremptories violate 34 appears, peremptorily eliminating remains widespread, much inquire afforded occurs. objects, judge, whom considerable trust, respond. otherwise, conclude rest This, effect, attributes eliminated Hence, prior dealing venires rather relevance 35 emphasizes inquiry; unconstitutional, more, more respond all. does, prospective strikes— allowed 36 Much litigation spell contours significant effect trials gainsaid. has, join judgment. 37 would, adhere DeStefano Woods, 392 631, 2093, 1308 (1968), reversal grant began date announcement decision. reached retroactivity Bloom Illinois, 194, 1477, 522 Daniel 420 31, 95 704, 42 790 (1975) (per curiam), Taylor 419 522, 692, 690 (1975), women panels Amendments. 38 39 POWELL's eloquent takes step toward shameful juries. cogently explains repugnancy ably demonstrates inadequacy "justice sit supinely by" flouted remedy available.1 write separately express my views. inject jury-selection process. goal accomplished entirely. little turned somewhat subtle keeping off venires. 231-238, 841-846, (1965) (Goldberg, dissenting); Kuhn, Discrimination: Next Phase, 41 S.Cal.L.Rev. 235 (1968); Van Dyke, Procedures: Our Uncertain Commitment Representative Panels 155-157 (1977) (hereinafter Dyke). changed, consequence continued. Misuse become common flagrant. Black rarely compile statistics extent few setting figures instructive. Carter, 528 844, 848 (CA8 1975) (in 1974 Western District Missouri defendants, 81% jurors), 425 1745, 206 (1976); McDaniels, 379 1243 (ED La.1974) 53 1972-1974 Eastern Louisiana federal 68.9% less one-quarter venire); McKinney Walker, 394 1015, 1017-1018 (SC 1974) 1970-1971 Spartansburg South Carolina, 82% affirmance order, 529 516 (CA4 1975).2 Prosecutors routinely 375 So.2d 1163-1164 (La.1979). An instruction book office Dallas explicitly advised eliminate 'any minority group.' "3 felony County 1983-1984, struck 467 eligible jurors; sitting 10, compared white.4 discussion utter needs amplification. 'in pass [a defendant's] life, liberty, property, shall them, color.' 394, (1881), quoting Virginia Rives, 313, 323, 667 dissenting, concedes black, best "crudely stereotypical hopelessly mistaken" notions. Post, 138. Yet taking crude, inaccurate stereotypes—even interests. justified likely whites sympathetically notion "intelligence, experience, moral integrity," Neal, entrusted role. 43 wholeheartedly concur juries, go further, fashioning adequate Merely allowing illegitimate 44 Evidentiary analysis similar set ante, 97-98, adopted matter including Massachusetts California. Cases jurisdictions illustrate limitations approach. First, attack unless flagrant means, two survive compunction about them 382 189, 415 805, 809-810 (1981) (no three Puerto Rican, excludes cause remainder peremptorily, producing all-white jury); Rousseau, 129 Cal.App.3d 526, 536-537, 179 892, 897-898 (1982) panel). left "acceptable" level. 45 motives. King Nassau, 581 493, 501-502 (EDNY 1984). Any easily assert facially juror, ill equipped second-guess How treat statement son age defendant, Hall, 161, 197 71, 672 854 (1983), seemed "uncommunicative," King, 498, "never cracked smile" and, "did possess sensitivities realistically issues case," 165, 73, P.2d, 856? generated explanations sufficient obligation justify grounds, erected illusory. 46 outright prevarication danger here. "[I]t even attorney lie himself effort convince motives legal." 502. conscious unconscious racism lead "sullen," "distant," characterization acted identically. judge's accept well supported. REHNQUIST concedes, "seat-of-the-pants instincts" how vote. 138; THE CHIEF JUSTICE's 123. often just term prejudice. Even approach intentions, confront levels—a doubt meet. worth remembering "114 years close War Between nearly still remain whole." Rose Mitchell, 443 558-559, 99 2993, 3001, 61 739 quoted Vasquez Hillery, 474 254, 264, 617, 624, 598 (1986). inherent distort permitting grounds ideally ban entirely 167-169; Imlay, Federal Reformation: Saving Democratic Institution, Loyola (LA) L.Rev. 247, 269-270 (1973). Goldberg, emphasized "[w]ere absolute choice between chosen conformity compels former." 244, 849. believe presents choice, resolve cases. Some authors suggested entirely, zealously guard "essential jury," Lewis 146 376, 136, 138, 1011 (1892), "one secured accused," Pointer 151 396, 408, 410, 414, 208 (1894). 167; Brown, McGuire, & Winters, Peremptory Challenge Manipulative Device Criminal Trials: Traditional Use Abuse, England 192 (1978). find acceptable solution. "requires freedom bias accused, prosecution. scales evenly held." Hayes Missouri, 120 68, 70, 350, 353, 578 (1887). maintain balance, engage selection, banning well. 49 ink spilled regarding defendants' approving comments Courts noted above; "very old credentials" 212, 813, cited "long widely jury." 835. stated magnitude, withheld altogether impairing impartial Frazier 335 497, 505, 11, 201, 206, 93 187 (1948); Wood, 299 123, 57 177, 185, 81 78 (1936); (1919); prejudice, inheres cost well, think too great price pay. applaud opinion. ended. BRENNAN joins, 52 JUSTICE correctly identifies apparent inconsistency criticism Colorado Connelly, 1050, 785, 763 (1986) (memorandum joined J.), Jersey T.L.O., 468 1214, 104 3583, 82 881 (STEVENS, dissenting)—cases directed brief argue petition certiorari—and finding despite 115-116, nn. however—unlike Connelly T.L.O. —the party defending judgment rested controlling affirmance. judgment, Kentucky's Assistant Attorney General centrality issue: ". Mr. Chief Justice, please versus 54 item challenged, perhaps address problem. dealt primarily individuals identifiable group. 56 "Petitioners California's wherein authority resolving So, indeed issue. guts basic 58 "In closing, firmly embraced respectfully affirm Alabama."1 59 addition party's defense several amici curiae addressed argument. instance, Solicitor begins: 60 "PETITIONER DID NOT ESTABLISH THAT HE WAS DEPRIVED OF PROPERLY CONSTITUTED PETIT JURY OR DENIED EQUAL PROTECTION LAWS "A. Under Defendant Cannot Establish Violation Showing Only Veniremen Were Subjected Prosecution His Case"2 Several similarly issue.3 although suppose reargument enable better informed problem percolating years,4 acts wisely arguments already Court.5 64 views today's apply retroactively. dissenting. certiorari provisions guaranteeing representing community." Pet. Cert. i. Today sets aside procedure centuries years. rejected, dissent, (1965). Reversal settled unusual enough terms, said "stare decisis, while persuasive question, doctrine demands governed law." Akron Center Reproductive Health, Inc., 462 416, 420, 2481, 2487, 76 687 (1983). What truly extraordinary raise, Kentucky. disclaimed specifically Amendment, pressing instead Amendment. Brief Appellant Reply 84-SC-733-MR (Ky.). oral here: "We claim. specific briefs either saying attacking such." Tr. Oral Arg. 6-7. barrier prevented raising courts. improper Court: 'The refused .' Illinois Gates, 459 1028, 1029, 2, 436, 437, 595 dissenting) Cardinale 438, 1161, 1162-63, 398 (1969)). Neither nor STEVENS offers justification departing time-honored principle, dates Owings Norwood's Lessee, Cranch 344, (1809), Crowell Randell, 368, 458 (1836). pressed surely provides additional completely separate procedural novelty Petitioner's "question presented" involved "constitutional merits, heading distinguishing irrelevance present 11; (1975). argument, pointedly asked: 71 "QUESTION: not? 72 "MR. NIEHAUS: Yes. Your Amendment? 75 Is correct? what arguing, yes. You asking reconsideration you reconsidered behalf solicitor general. 80 such. ." 5-7. short later, discussing difficulties attendant claim, colloquy occurred: So back again why didn't head on, take overrule wouldn't like result. Simply adopting remedy? 84 comfort, Honor, no. concession." 10. Later, answer implications concerns: [T]here allows kind strike. possible. am really prepared question. 20. reaching refusal it, departs dramatically normal explanation. have—as sometimes do—directed See, e.g., Paris Adult Theatre Slaton, 408 921, 331 (1972); (1986).1 Brown Board Education, 972, 1114, 1388 supra; (1984).2 particularly appropriate reexamination consideration. Garcia San Antonio Transit Authority, 1213, 3582, 880 (directing briefing National League Cities Usery, 833, 2465, 245 (1976), reconsidered); Alfred Dunhill London, Inc. Republic Cuba, 422 1005, 2624, 668 Banco Nacional de Cuba Sabbatino, 376 923, 804 (1964), reconsidered). Alternatively, dismissed improvidently granted. rejects courses choosing reverse 21-year-old unanimous STEVENS' concurrence. believes affirmance." Ante, 109. 1, ("[T]here presenting new alternative below") (emphasis original). sure, supporting cite limited explaining negative gloss actually event, strange jurisprudence looks breadth Of directly odds Rule 21.1(a), "[o]nly forth therein considered Court." cite, aware of, 200-year history seized permit obtain relief urge ground. observes 109-110. thought "point brief," "has advanced petitioners it." Knetsch 364 361, 132, 137, 128 (1960). objections brought agreed MARSHALL 963, 2439, referred approval, 2438 (opinion respecting Nonetheless, wrote "more later date." 962, 2439. conditions exist today. "might years." 110. bottom extremely though otherwise.3 "[d]ecisions manner unlikely withstand test time." Leon, 897, 3430, 3448, 702 Before contemplating holding, least reconsidered. chooses presented, useful discuss acknowledges, albeit footnote, 'very credentials' 'widely jury.' 91, 835). proper resolution nodding reference purpose Long "[t]he almost essential perfect impartiality trial." W. Forsyth, History Trial 175 (1852). scrutiny existed. "It amongst Romans Lex Servilia (B.C. 104) enacted accuser severally propose hundred judices, each fifty list other, alleged crime." Ibid.; Pettingal, Enquiry Practice Juries Among Greeks 115, 135 (1769). development early days England: felonies law, originally tend 'infinite delayes danger.' Coke Littleton 156 (14th ed. 1791). Thus Ordinance Inquests, Edw. Stat. (1305), 'they sue Jurors, assign Cause certain.' persistent sides, construed allow 'stand aside' until gone challenges; deficiency box point Crown recalled number. Peremptories sides became England, continuing above form separation Colonies." 212-213, 831-32 (footnotes omitted). venerable tradition country well: system, Congress took hand establishing treason specified 1790 Act punishable death, 119 (1790). regard offenses statute, Government source clear. course paralleled conferred corresponding English retained Crown's common-law stand aside, 1870, statutes conferring substantial half, to, defendant." 214-216, 833 101 ignoring teachings history, contrasts rationale observed: 102 function extremes partiality assure otherwise. satisfies 'to perform high way, satisfy appearance justice." ' re Murchison, 349 133, 623, 942 (1955)). Permitting regarded strengthen One commentator recognized: peremptory, giving avoids trafficking truth stereotypes. Common human sense, psychosociological studies, polls tell classes people statistically predispositions inappropriate kinds knowledge expressed evaluative terms undercut desire judged reasonable open compromise. [For example,] [a]lthough experience reveals males class young alienated middle class, enunciate concrete expression societally divisive. Instead evolved covert dare say know true not." Babcock, Voir Dire: Preserving "Its Wonderful Power," Stan.L.Rev. 553-554 these, concluded [peremptory] 'one rights' (1894)). century, then, impairment reversible error (1892)). considering bulk spent recounting well-established groups nothing "application" "principles Strauder," maintains, 89-90, curious unrecognized century. difficulty unanimously concluding 135-137 (REHNQUIST, "[d]efendants composition. 538, S.Ct, 702. 107 moment's reflection quickly vast differences exclusions allegations today: 108 "Exclusion summons implies government (usually legislative branch) determination unfit Exercise contrast, represents discrete decision, opposed litigants phase adversary venireperson unfavorable litigant others 109 "Thus, excluding pools stigmatizing interrelated not. former singles equally basis, affiliation. Further, venire-pool priori across-the-board total unfitness, peremptory-strike suggests isolated focuses infers inferiority, necessarily insulting. concerns, favor own, Leslie, 783 541, 554 (CA5 1986) (en banc). Unwilling invokes holding. lodged, necessity, "normally irrelevant namely, religion, nationality, occupation affiliations duty." 220, 835-36. act information hunch. sole "assumption" "intuitive judgment." 97. result, unadulterated inapplicable clause minimum "rationality" 'an capricious right,' 378, 139); invalidate "stereotypic notions," Mississippi University Women Hogan, 718, 725, 3331, 3336, 1090 (1982), 'sudden impressions unaccountable prejudices apt conceive bare gestures another.' Lewis, 138 Blackstone, Commentaries 353). 111 conventional shown race; clearly contains limitation. (to group") added); ibid. ("Finally, ") added). apply, presumably object sex, Craig Boren, 190, 451, 397 age, Bd. Retirement Murgia, 427 307, 2562, 520 religious political affiliation, Karcher Daggett, 748, 2653, 2668-2669, 133 concurring); mental capacity, Cleburne Living Center, 432, 3249, 313 (1985); children, Dandridge Williams, 471, 1153, (1970); living arrangements, Agriculture Moreno, 413 528, 2821, 782 (1973); employment industry, Minnesota Clover Leaf Creamery 449 456, 715, 659 (1981), profession, Williamson Lee Optical 348 483, 563 (1955).4 112 short, quite probable every objected venireman characteristic remaining constituted "classification" 1113, 1139 1984) (Meskill, dissenting), 84-1426. Compounding difficulties, uses reviewed "strict sustained suitably tailored compelling interest," Cleburne, 440, 3255; determined "substantially sufficiently 441, rational end." 442, 3255. 113 framework hand, avoid acknowledging interest historically substantial, compelling. achieve sympathetic neither witnesses factor occupation, characteristic. Nearly principles, magnitude ancient lineage silent strength interest, leaving issue, others, "litigation [that] (WHITE, concurring).5 114 purports "no limit counsel." 89, inescapable import novel inevitably valuable tool attorneys alike. rationally not?6 "Our 'requires held.' 1729 concurring) 351, (1887)). 115 Rather straightforward analysis, substitutes hybrid. "prima 93-94, jurors." operation rules" "[o]ur 'disparate treatment'. 94, 18. adds, borrowing Title VII 'clear reasonably specific' 'legitimate reasons' challenges." 98, Texas Dept. Community Affairs Burdine, 248, 1089, 1096, 207 (1981)).7 116 undoubtedly suited contexts, (as VII) Congress,8 seem curiously place types challenges: Challenges obviously explained; definition, prisoner dislike, cause." H. Joy, Jurors (1844) Analytically, ground: readily apparent, force [to] collapse Clark, 737 679, 682 (CA7 Indeed, dissent permitted, pro tanto, longer examination, afterwards." 222, 117 Confronted dilemma created, attempts decree "neutral explanation" pains "emphasize" "explanation loss discern governing "clear specific" "legitimate reasons" distinguish Anything seen "arbitrary capricious" Blackstone's peremptory. 353. Apparently envisions permissible bit arbitrary—but much. judges "experienced dire," 97, administering this. 118 purporting "further justice," 99, effect. Assume Asian capital murder victim, asks members, white, harbor Asians. Turner Murray, 36-37, 1683, ----, flush "juror [Asians] violence-prone morally inferior. 35.9 harboring unconvinced protestations. Instead, continues hunch, "assumption," judgment," prejudiced him, basis. States: "[H]ow (when defend life) totally disconcert him; wills man conceived dislike." "articulate explanation," probably produce impartial. "disconcert" litigants; diminish 121 painful paradox interject matters process, contrary thrust line "melting pot." (1953), confronted situation done tickets box; names printed different tickets. down scheme. Frankfurter "opportunity working exists whenever part, slips differentiates colored 894 (concurring) 122 mark return differentiation accepts positive perceived one. alike build records fashion background national origin record, "such offensive thus asked dire." Motton, 596, 604, 217 704 176, 180, modified, 4b (1985) (advance sheet).10 sure tax determining "require continued monitoring recording 'group' composition prospective. 294, 915, (1978) (Richardson, 123 "record" disputes arise. reversed court's announced, Carolyn Pritchett, press she A.B.A.J. (Nov. 1985). California rehearing petition.11 124 tarry difficult, problems, preferring swiftly slides history: "[W]e attempt instruct [trial] implement today." 99-100, 24. leaves roughly 7,000 approximately 500 large morass essentially wishes begin enterprise sorting newly created "right." colleagues wishing Nation's struggle grasp mind, attention "implementation" leads "good" let alone "best" way. frustrated reviewing promulgated 125 quagmire quotas define quantify courtroom. pursuit perfection appellate provide speculative impractical answers artificial questions." Holley J Sweeping 143 588, 595-596, 74, (Holmdahl, (footnote 126 "furthe[r] hoped-for utopian bliss admired, far enlarge "sporting contest" theory roundly condemned Roscoe Pound day. Pound, Causes Popular Dissatisfaction Administration August 29, 1906, reprinted Conference: Perspectives Future 337 (A. Levin R. Wheeler eds. 1979). "too current dissatisfaction organization procedure." 352. afraid justly disapproval. 127 add assent WHITE's (concurring); (O'CONNOR, concurring). Solem Stumes, 465 638, 1338, 1343, 579 (1984), '[t]he guiding [retroactivity] implicate standards, enforcement authorities (c) retroactive standards.' Stovall Denno, 388 293, 297 [87 1967, 1970, 1199] (1967)." ignore Harlan's admonition changes "cuts loose precedent," Mackey 401 680, 1160, 1174, 404 (1971) (concurring judgment), conclusively nonretroactive With factor, announces avert convicting innocent." Tehan ex rel. Shott, 459, 465, 453 (1966). "law justifiably Solem, 645-646, 1343. Today's "overrule[s] [a] decision" drastically "transform[s] practice." 647, 1343-1344. "virtually compel[s]" nonretroactivity. Johnson, 457 537, 2579, 2586-87, 202 (1982). Third, retroactively host chaos. Determining showing" intent, so, actions, reconstructing something undertaken soon trial.12 virtual impossibility." Neil, 481, 488 (Fla.1984). 130 sum, holdings impossible construct colorable application. judicially Cal.3d, 283, Cal.Rptr., 908, 766, 31; 488; 38, (1979).13 position, (concurring), 131 institution fabric casually cast especially argued aptly 132 real tinker anything else, job centuries. shoulders ancestors, Burke said. past always preserving, argued, 'it infinite caution ought venture pulling edifice, answered tolerable degree ages society. Younger, Unlawful Challenges, Litigation 23, (Fall 1980). At least, reversing next Term. 134 states, opening involves majority deals "evidentiary burden[s]." overrules fundamental substantive case-specific rejection unjustifiable dissent. 136 carefully distinguished scenarios Part scenarios, Negro population," 838, 222-228, 837-40. felt furthered be." 837 Nevertheless, th[is] violated. failed carry 226, 839. Three Justices dissented, arguing satisfied testimony county. 228-247, 840-50 Warren, Douglas, 137 Significantly, second peremptory-challenge scenario. 209-222, 829-37. writing explained: "While narrowly specified, provable legally partiality, imagined designated demonstrable. [7 352, 578] [1887]. another,' [v. 370,] [13 1011] [1892], juror's 'habits associations,' [120 U.S.,] 351], feeling 'the questioning juror's] indifference provoke resentment,' [146 138]. frequently normally duty. nationality partial, be. Hence light affiliations, tried. 139 considerations quest Protestant Catholic, traditional entail radical change 220-222, 835-837 added; footnotes 140 beginning reiterated: insulate trying, charged." 141 dissenters majority's prohibit facing [not] mean shown, case." 245, 849 142 asserts, 89. states burden" context, instant absolutely regard, subscribe unprecedented restrict scope described view, "unequal" Hispanics hispanic Asians on. blacks, matter, treatment.1 Such seat-of-the-pants instincts, crudely mistaken. nationalities, see—and certainly explained—how 144 infringe results fair-cross-section 84-85, And nonblack 87-88. 145 "proxy" belong 541 banc); 844 1975), devoted "proxies" defendant2 another. holds violating Constitution. provision, justifies departure contained below. Following construing Constitution, Appeals 762 85-1028; 1113 1984), Riley State, 496 A.2d 997, 1009-1013 (Del.1985); 481 (Fla.1984); (1979). Crespin, N.M. 486, 612 716 (App.1980). Other adhering violation. Childress, 715 1313 1983) banc), 464 1063, 744, (1984); Whitfield, 147 1983). Beed 271 Ark. 530-531, 609 898, 903 (1980); Blackwell 248 Ga. 281 S.E.2d 599-600 (1981); Gilliard 428 576, (Miss.), 867, 40, (1983); McCray, N.Y.2d 542, 546-549, N.Y.S.2d 442-445, 916-919 Lynch, 300 N.C. 534, 546-547, 268 168-169 (1980). disagreed supervisory Compare Jackson, 696 578, 592-593 1982), 460 1073, 1531, 952 La.1974). Rules Procedure authorize Ky.Rule Crim.Proc. 9.38. After simultaneously seated plus allowable 9.36. offense charged felony, alternate called, nine. 9.40. (1880); (1881); Hollins Oklahoma, 295 784, 1500 (1935) curiam ); Pierre 306 354, 536, 757 (1939); 463, 184, (1947); (1967) (1979); prohibiting "are grand 626, 3, 1223, 583-584. reinforced States. U.S.C. 243. framed inviting reconsider precedents. insisted claiming record. turns merits arguments. 286-287, 631-32, opinion); (1945); 394. pool mirror community distinctive concept proportional representation impossibility illustrated unconstitutional. Williams 399 78, 102-103, 1893, 1906-1907, 446 287, 632; Atkins 530, 697-698; 1905-1906. Powell, Crimes, Wash. feature American protected Due Process 147-158, 1446-52. prevent oppression Government." 155, 156-157, 1450-52. check power, 1451; Glasser 315 60, 86-88, 457, 473, (1942). compromising representative quality "juries ready weapons oppress numbered unpopular inarticulate minorities." 1281 (Murphy, 350 (Cooley 1899) (quoted 152, 1449). Sims 407, 523, 525, 634 548-549, 645-46; 561, 580; 319, 338; 397. counsel. techniques lawyers seek 183-189 Prior serves wish education, employment, economic status, jurisdictions, time, 116-118, learn employ professional investigators interview occasion practice. counsel's possibly (1986); 628-629, 1224-1225; 205, 827-828, (1965); Coleman (1964); extensive commentary. 166-167; 268-270 235, 283-303 Note, Rethinking Limitations Challenge, Colum.L.Rev. 1357 Systematic Prospective Basis Race, Miss.L.J. 157 Comment, Alabama: Constitutional Blueprint Perpetuation All-White Jury, Va.L.Rev. 1157 Innocence White Mich.L.Rev. 1611 (1985). commentators Saltzburg Powers, Clash Impartiality Group Representation, Md.L.Rev. 835; 212-219, 831-835. Jenkins, 701 850, 859-860 (CA10 1983); Boykin, 679 1240, 1245 1982); 448 1207, 1213-1218 1971); Thigpen Ala.App. 233, 270 666, 673 Jackson 331, 336, 432 876, 878 Johnson Md.App. 143, 148-150, 262 792, 796-797 N.J.Super. 311 (1973) Shaw, 284 366, 585 1120, systematically Fifth observed, investigate, jurisdiction, 1217 (1971). believed "most difficult" transcribed, insurmountable. 285-286, 908-909, 767-768 "disparate treatment" Civil Rights 1964 rules. McDonnell Douglas Corp. Green, 411 1817, Postal Service Governors Aikens, 711, 1478, 403 persuasion. 252-256, 1093-95. Decisions him. 18, Second 1132, "[t]here bases" desirable excusable 1096. recent sex fact" deference court. Anderson Bessemer City, 470 573, 1504, 1511, 518 findings consideration turn evaluation credibility, deference. 575-576, 1512-1513. MARSHALL's prosecutorial share them. fulfill purposes. Certainly, assume alert identify abolished apprehension conscientiously respective duties standard, imposed five earlier, burdensome judges. variety courts, previously associated 773, disallow resume improperly reinstated 1977). response strikes, Martin, Pa. 289, 299, 336 (Nix, Harris 1261, 3556, 858 466 981, 2364, 836 Observer, May 1973, 9, col. earlier treatise circulated county instructed prosecutors: "Do Jews, Negroes, Dagos, Mexicans rich educated." Quoted Morning News, Mar. 1986, 1; Case Study Challenge: Subtle Strike Process, St. Louis U.L.J. 662 (1974). 27-28, 43. Amicus Curiae 7. Attorneys Association, begins follows: "This fourteenth amendment sixth amendment. otherwise modify Alabama." Amici NAACP Legal Educational Fund, Jewish Committee, 24-36; Lawyers' Committee Law 11-17; Elizabeth Holtzman 13. 2439 eventual habeas corpus disposition proved landmark ripe review. 5-7 (relying heavily review). opinions viability 1118-1124. pending 84-1426 (Question 2). shortly agreeing hear Batson, motion consolidate together. Presumably Batson grappled Abrams 1097, 2318, consolidate). disagree petition. contrasting views, see, Bender Williamsport Area School Dist., 475 551, 1326, 1336, 501 (BURGER, (addressing standing); Nunez, 324, 1257, 338 C.J.) (expressing writ state-court independent grounds); Florida Casal, 637, 639, 3100, 3101-3102, 277 (agreeing noting amend enforcement"). (ordering raised); 1214 (same). memorandum objecting "it hardly 'second chair' alter strategy mistakes. '[o]nly Court.' Given disclaimer [this] 'fairly included' submitted. direction anyway plainly concern, dispensation however strong claim." 786-87. directing "cause concern," fortiori expansive warrant concern. dissented order They briefed argued. Evidently unwilling parties, dismissing granted, orders [petitioner] bring Volunteering unwanted advice wise action. "I functions effectively initiative lawyers, activism review." 1215-1216, 3584-3585. proffered notwithstanding, opinion), reach reaches distinguishes 111, concurring), 3101-02, discussed advanced, briefed, parsimoniously "[un]necessary petition." approach, dissents important, none overturn (1986), My end. distinctions standing obtaining relief. 1226-27, rests "assumptions," sociological studies foundations. 337, 365, "[i]f affiliation accurate, intended—to 365. "[E]very spoken likewise prohibited." 565 overturning stretching long, proceeding miniature." "potential" realized. observing locate deficiencies discerns urging below, "[i]n reconciling instructive accommodation 1968, 1861 et seq. [T]he House Report bill undisturbed purely subjective reasons.' 20, H.R.Rep. 1076, 90th Cong., 2d Sess., 5-6 (1968)), U.S.Code Cong. Admin.News pp. 1792, 1795. inapplicability seeking Surely generalized, stereotypic notions contexts. attempted finesse asserting "discrimination appearances verified descent, excusing appear case" 180. suggests, concerns actual spring from. unclear made. Similar lurk remand. selected." 83. statement, counsel, looking yes; it's App. underscored entitling virtually recall did. 35. Delaware 997 litigated published note fewer "minorities" "majorities," "majority" "minority" unequal flaws demonstrated Judge Garwood's thoughtful en banc 558-561 DiMatteo, Mass.App. 547, 754 (under juror).

Category: 1