Fill This Form To Receive Instant Help

Help in Homework
trustpilot ratings
google ratings


Homework answers / question archive / The Supreme Court has repeatedly asserted that a defendant is not entitled to a jury "composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race

The Supreme Court has repeatedly asserted that a defendant is not entitled to a jury "composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race

Psychology

The Supreme Court has repeatedly asserted that a defendant is not entitled to a jury "composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race." Although these rulings establish that states are not obligated to use racially mixed juries, they do no prohibit states from doing so. In fact, a number of policymakers and legal scholars have proposed reforms that use racial criteria to promote racial diversity on American juries.

QUESTIONS:

Some have suggested that the names of majority race jurors be removed from the jury list (thus ensuring a larger proportion of racial minorities); others have suggested that a certain number of seats on each jury be set aside for racial minorities.

How would you justify these reforms to a state legislature?
How would an opponent of these reforms respond?
Overall, are these good ideas or bad ideas?

Option 1

Low Cost Option
Download this past answer in few clicks

2.89 USD

PURCHASE SOLUTION

Already member?


Option 2

Custom new solution created by our subject matter experts

GET A QUOTE

rated 5 stars

Purchased 3 times

Completion Status 100%

Sitejabber (5.0)

BBC (5.0)

Trustpilot (4.8)

Google (5.0)

Related Questions