The Current State of the Peremptory Challenge

By Beck, Coburn R. | William and Mary Law Review, February 1998 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

The Current State of the Peremptory Challenge


Beck, Coburn R., William and Mary Law Review


The peremptory challenge,(1) once defined by the U.S. Supreme Court as a challenge "exercised without a reason stated, without inquiry and without being subject to the court's control,"(2) no longer exists in the American judicial system.(3) In Batson v. Kentucky(4) and its progeny,(5) the Supreme Court ignored common sense and bastardized the English language by redefining the peremptory challenge to represent its antithesis.(6) This jurisprudence, which retains the peremptory challenge in name only, has forced trial court judges to traverse a difficult path through the complexities of equal protection claims, the uniqueness of third party standing, the dilemma of whose rights to protect, and the opaque pretext behind parties' alleged neutral use of the peremptory challenge.

These knotty concerns most recently surfaced in a split between the Fifth and Seventh Circuits.(7) The split resulted from the unconstitutional use of peremptory challenges in United States v. Boyd(8) and United States v. Huey.(9) The defendants in both cases used their peremptory challenges to strike prospective jurors solely because of the prospective jurors' race.(10) The courts differed, however, as to whether the defendants should be granted new trials due to their unconstitutional employment of the peremptory challenges.(11) This circuit split stands as a testament to the Supreme Court's misguided jurisprudence that made the long-standing peremptory challenge irrational and functionally obsolete.(12)

This Note will address the Supreme Court's whittling away of the peremptory challenge and the confusion that has resulted from its opinions. The first portion of the Note will detail the history of the peremptory challenge,(13) devoting particular attention to the Court's treatment of the peremptory, from its opinion in Swain v. Alabama,(14) to its most recent cases decided in the wake of J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.(15) The second part of this Note will explain the facts and holdings in United States v. Huey and United States v. Boyd and detail to what extent the cases may be factually distinguishable.(16) The Fifth and Seventh Circuits' holdings will be held as indicia of a greater confusion stemming from Supreme Court jurisprudence. This Note will then predict the probable outcome should the Supreme Court decide to resolve the issue raised by the circuit split.(17) The third part of this Note will analyze the options available to the Supreme Court in resolving the problems many critics see in the Court's current treatment of the peremptory challenge.(18) Finally, this Note will conclude by presenting the most logical, though admittedly unlikely, course for the future of the peremptory challenge.(19)

HISTORY OF THE PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE

The Peremptory Challenge v. the "For Cause" Challenge

To understand the history of the peremptory challenge, it must first be distinguished from its counterpart, the "for cause" challenge. Traditionally, the peremptory challenge permitted a party to strike a member of the venire(20) without needing to explain to the court the reasoning for the strike.(21) In contrast, the for cause challenge demands that a party give a "narrowly specified, provable and legally cognizable basis of partiality" for the strike.(22) Litigants often ground for cause challenges on a prospective juror's familial or social relationship to one of the parties, failure to meet statutory qualifications for jury duty, or other specific evidence of bias.(23)

The peremptory and for cause challenges also differ in the number allowed by the courts. A party may exercise an unlimited number of for cause challenges.(24) Peremptory challenges, however, are limited to the number specified by statute in the jurisdiction.(25) The federal courts limit a litigant to three peremptory challenges in civil cases,(26) while allowing the government six peremptory challenges and the defendant ten peremptory challenges in felony cases.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

The Current State of the Peremptory Challenge
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?