Peremptory Challenge

In Kennedy Race, Crime, and the Law; chapter 6, he covers the Peremptory Challenge, which allows attorneys to exclude potential jurors without having initially to articulate the basis for the exclusion. In other words, giving a defendant or lawyer the right to object to a proposed juror, without a given reason. Kennedy also goes in depth to explain two controversies issues regarding the usage of the peremptory challenge, such as the conflict over the racially discriminatory peremptory challenge and how racial discrimination is practiced despite the formal legal disapproval. In chapter 7, Kennedy moves forward to cover whether or not ceasing to discriminate against racial minorities will suffice to establish racial justice or to cease discrimination
To demonstrate and answer some of my unanswered questions Kennedy delivers strong cases that clearly shows that race has the potential to impact trial outcomes, such as the Swain v. Alabama and Batson v. Kentucky cases. It is obvious that the fairness of the criminal justice system has been called into question. I never knew that the justice system history in relations to the peremptory challenge caused disadvantages upon blacks until reading Kennedy’s arguments; my thoughts on the peremptory challenge are that it is unfair because a potential juror’s gender or racial orientation should not be grounds for a peremptory challenge. However, I suggest that the larger issue is that it’s easy for lawyers to hide their motives for discriminating against some groups. Equally important, it’s easy for the courts and lawyers to conceal discriminatory motives for so-called peremptory challenges of prospective jurors. The courts have failed to gain recognition and rejection of the practice of excluding blacks from the jury: First by the composition of the jury panels and second in the use of peremptory challenges to remove blacks who reach the panels from which the jury is