Prosecutors’ own handwritten notes were the only way to expose racial jury strikes

Evidence

A recent case illustrates how difficult it can be to actually prove the race-based nature of potential challenges. In Foster v. Chatman (2016), the Supreme Court agreed to hear a petitioner’s case when the defense discovered notes written by the prosecutors during the voir dire process; they had written the letter “B” circled next to all the African American potential jurors. The nation’s highest court eventually rejected the prosecutor’s arguments that their peremptory challenges were not based on race (e.g., prosecutors maintained they had removed jurors because of age). In particular, the reason provided for one of the challenges was youth, yet a younger White juror remained on the jury. In its most recent decision on the topic, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Curtis Flowers’s conviction in his sixth trial, ruling that the peremptory challenges used by the prosecution violated the constitution (Flowers v. Mississippi, 2019). In Flowers’s first four trials, the prosecution tried to strike all thirty-six of thirty-six prospective Black jurors. In his sixth trial, the prosecution used peremptory challenges to strike five of six potential Black jurors, and spent more time questioning Black potential jurors than White potential jurors. Although the Supreme Court overturned the convictions in both of these cases, the petitioners waited years for these reversals of their convictions and were required to take their appeals to the highest court in the land to do so. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 889 (#exemplifies, via linked claim)

A recent case illustrates how difficult it can be to actually prove the race-based nature of potential challenges. In Foster v. Chatman (2016), the Supreme Court agreed to hear a petitioner’s case when the defense discovered notes written by the prosecutors during the voir dire process; they had written the letter “B” circled next to all the African American potential jurors. The nation’s highest court eventually rejected the prosecutor’s arguments that their peremptory challenges were not based on race (e.g., prosecutors maintained they had removed jurors because of age). In particular, the reason provided for one of the challenges was youth, yet a younger White juror remained on the jury. In its most recent decision on the topic, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Curtis Flowers’s conviction in his sixth trial, ruling that the peremptory challenges used by the prosecution violated the constitution (Flowers v. Mississippi, 2019). In Flowers’s first four trials, the prosecution tried to strike all thirty-six of thirty-six prospective Black jurors. — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 889 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Prosecutors wrote circled ‘B’ notes next to all Black potential jurors — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 889; Peremptory strikes reveal bias only through explicit material like prosecutors’ notes — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law: A Definitive Look at…, 889; Legal professionals unconsciously generate race-neutral reasons for racially motivated jury strikes (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Prosecutors wrote circled ‘B’ notes next to all Black potential jurors #exemplifies (0.93) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 889
• Peremptory strikes reveal bias only through explicit material like prosecutors’ notes #expands (0.92) — Joseph Avery, Jim Sidanius, Joel Cooper, Gregory Davis, Amanda N., Bias in the Law, 889