batson
kentucky
argued
december
decided
april
criminal
trial
kentucky
state
petitioner
black
man
judge
conducted
voir
dire
examination
jury
venire
excused
certain
jurors
cause
prosecutor
used
peremptory
challenges
strike
four
black
persons
venire
jury
composed
white
persons
selected
defense
counsel
moved
discharge
jury
ground
prosecutor
removal
black
veniremen
violated
petitioner
rights
sixth
fourteenth
amendments
jury
drawn
cross
section
community
fourteenth
amendment
equal
protection
laws
without
expressly
ruling
petitioner
request
hearing
trial
judge
denied
motion
jury
ultimately
convicted
petitioner
affirming
conviction
kentucky
observed
recently
another
case
relied
swain
alabama
held
defendant
alleging
lack
fair
cross
section
must
demonstrate
systematic
exclusion
group
jurors
venire
held
principle
announced
strauder
west
virginia
state
denies
black
defendant
equal
protection
puts
trial
jury
members
race
purposefully
excluded
reaffirmed
pp
defendant
right
petit
jury
composed
whole
part
persons
race
strauder
west
virginia
however
equal
protection
clause
guarantees
defendant
state
exclude
members
race
jury
venire
account
race
false
assumption
members
race
group
qualified
serve
jurors
denying
person
participation
jury
service
account
race
state
also
unconstitutionally
discriminates
excluded
juror
moreover
selection
procedures
purposefully
exclude
black
persons
juries
undermine
public
confidence
fairness
system
justice
pp
equal
protection
principles
applied
determine
whether
discrimination
selecting
venire
also
govern
state
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
individual
jurors
petit
jury
although
prosecutor
ordinarily
entitled
exercise
peremptory
challenges
reason
long
reason
related
view
concerning
outcome
case
tried
equal
protection
clause
forbids
prosecutor
challenge
potential
jurors
solely
account
race
assumption
black
jurors
group
unable
impartially
consider
state
case
black
defendant
pp
portion
swain
alabama
supra
concerning
evidentiary
burden
placed
defendant
claims
denied
equal
protection
state
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
rejected
swain
held
black
defendant
make
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
proof
peremptory
challenge
system
whole
perverted
evidence
offered
defendant
swain
meet
standard
demonstrate
circumstances
prosecutors
jurisdiction
responsible
striking
black
jurors
beyond
facts
defendant
case
evidentiary
formulation
inconsistent
equal
protection
standards
subsequently
developed
decisions
relating
selection
jury
venire
defendant
may
make
prima
facie
showing
purposeful
racial
discrimination
selection
venire
relying
solely
facts
concerning
selection
case
pp
defendant
may
establish
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
solely
evidence
concerning
prosecutor
exercise
peremptory
challenges
defendant
trial
defendant
first
must
show
member
cognizable
racial
group
prosecutor
exercised
peremptory
challenges
remove
venire
members
defendant
race
defendant
may
also
rely
fact
peremptory
challenges
constitute
jury
selection
practice
permits
discriminate
mind
discriminate
finally
defendant
must
show
facts
relevant
circumstances
raise
inference
prosecutor
used
peremptory
challenges
exclude
veniremen
petit
jury
account
race
defendant
makes
prima
facie
showing
burden
shifts
state
come
forward
neutral
explanation
challenging
black
jurors
prosecutor
may
rebut
prima
facie
showing
stating
challenged
jurors
assumption
partial
defendant
shared
race
affirming
good
faith
individual
selections
pp
peremptory
challenge
occupies
important
position
trial
procedures
principles
undermine
contribution
challenge
generally
makes
administration
justice
application
principles
create
serious
administrative
difficulties
pp
trial
flatly
rejected
petitioner
objection
prosecutor
removal
black
persons
venire
without
requiring
prosecutor
explain
action
case
remanded
proceedings
powell
delivered
opinion
brennan
white
marshall
blackmun
stevens
joined
white
post
marshall
post
filed
concurring
opinions
stevens
filed
concurring
opinion
brennan
joined
post
filed
concurring
opinion
post
burger
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
joined
post
rehnquist
filed
dissenting
opinion
burger
joined
post
david
niehaus
argued
cause
petitioner
briefs
frank
heft
daniel
goyette
rickie
pearson
assistant
attorney
general
kentucky
argued
cause
respondent
brief
david
armstrong
attorney
general
carl
miller
assistant
attorney
general
deputy
solicitor
general
wallace
argued
cause
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
brief
acting
solicitor
general
fried
assistant
attorney
general
trott
sidney
glazer
briefs
amici
curiae
urging
reversal
filed
naacp
legal
defense
educational
fund
julius
levonne
chambers
charles
stephen
ralston
steven
winter
anthony
amsterdam
samuel
rabinove
lawyers
committee
civil
rights
law
barry
sullivan
fred
fishman
robert
kapp
norman
redlich
william
robinson
norman
chachkin
michael
mccray
et
al
steven
shapiro
robert
weiss
donald
kuebler
robert
miller
jack
yelverton
filed
brief
national
district
attorneys
association
amicus
curiae
urging
affirmance
briefs
amici
curiae
filed
national
legal
aid
defender
association
patricia
unsinn
elizabeth
holtzman
elizabeth
holtzman
pro
se
barbara
underwood
justice
powell
delivered
opinion
case
requires
us
reexamine
portion
swain
alabama
concerning
evidentiary
burden
placed
criminal
defendant
claims
denied
equal
protection
state
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
members
race
petit
jury
petitioner
black
man
indicted
kentucky
charges
burglary
receipt
stolen
goods
first
day
trial
jefferson
circuit
judge
conducted
voir
dire
examination
venire
excused
certain
jurors
cause
permitted
parties
exercise
peremptory
challenges
prosecutor
used
peremptory
challenges
strike
four
black
persons
venire
jury
composed
white
persons
selected
defense
counsel
moved
discharge
jury
sworn
ground
prosecutor
removal
black
veniremen
violated
petitioner
rights
sixth
fourteenth
amendments
jury
drawn
cross
section
community
fourteenth
amendment
equal
protection
laws
counsel
requested
hearing
motion
without
expressly
ruling
request
hearing
trial
judge
observed
parties
entitled
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
anybody
want
judge
denied
petitioner
motion
reasoning
requirement
applies
selection
venire
selection
petit
jury
jury
convicted
petitioner
counts
appeal
kentucky
petitioner
pressed
among
claims
argument
concerning
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
conceding
swain
alabama
supra
apparently
foreclosed
equal
protection
claim
based
solely
prosecutor
conduct
case
petitioner
urged
follow
decisions
people
wheeler
cal
commonwealth
soares
mass
cert
denied
hold
conduct
violated
rights
sixth
amendment
kentucky
constitution
jury
drawn
cross
section
community
petitioner
also
contended
facts
showed
prosecutor
engaged
pattern
discriminatory
challenges
case
established
equal
protection
violation
swain
kentucky
affirmed
single
paragraph
declined
petitioner
invitation
adopt
reasoning
people
wheeler
supra
commonwealth
soares
supra
observed
recently
reaffirmed
reliance
swain
held
defendant
alleging
lack
fair
cross
section
must
demonstrate
systematic
exclusion
group
jurors
venire
see
commonwealth
mcferron
granted
certiorari
reverse
ii
swain
alabama
recognized
state
purposeful
deliberate
denial
negroes
account
race
participation
jurors
administration
justice
violates
equal
protection
clause
principle
consistently
repeatedly
reaffirmed
numerous
decisions
preceding
following
swain
reaffirm
principle
today
century
ago
decided
state
denies
black
defendant
equal
protection
laws
puts
trial
jury
members
race
purposefully
excluded
strauder
west
virginia
decision
laid
foundation
unceasing
efforts
eradicate
racial
discrimination
procedures
used
select
venire
individual
jurors
drawn
strauder
explained
central
concern
recently
ratified
fourteenth
amendment
put
end
governmental
discrimination
account
race
exclusion
black
citizens
service
jurors
constitutes
primary
example
evil
fourteenth
amendment
designed
cure
holding
racial
discrimination
jury
selection
offends
equal
protection
clause
strauder
recognized
however
defendant
right
petit
jury
composed
whole
part
persons
race
number
races
nationalities
stands
way
evolution
conception
demand
equal
protection
akins
texas
defendant
right
tried
jury
whose
members
selected
pursuant
nondiscriminatory
criteria
martin
texas
ex
parte
virginia
equal
protection
clause
guarantees
defendant
state
exclude
members
race
jury
venire
account
race
strauder
supra
false
assumption
members
race
group
qualified
serve
jurors
see
norris
alabama
neal
delaware
purposeful
racial
discrimination
selection
venire
violates
defendant
right
equal
protection
denies
protection
trial
jury
intended
secure
idea
jury
body
composed
peers
equals
person
whose
rights
selected
summoned
determine
neighbors
fellows
associates
persons
legal
status
society
holds
strauder
supra
see
carter
jury
greene
county
petit
jury
occupied
central
position
system
justice
safeguarding
person
accused
crime
arbitrary
exercise
power
prosecutor
judge
duncan
louisiana
venire
must
indifferently
chosen
secure
defendant
right
fourteenth
amendment
protection
life
liberty
race
color
prejudice
strauder
supra
racial
discrimination
selection
jurors
harms
accused
whose
life
liberty
summoned
try
competence
serve
juror
ultimately
depends
assessment
individual
qualifications
ability
impartially
consider
evidence
presented
trial
see
thiel
southern
pacific
person
race
simply
unrelated
fitness
juror
frankfurter
dissenting
long
ago
strauder
therefore
recognized
denying
person
participation
jury
service
account
race
state
unconstitutionally
discriminated
excluded
juror
see
carter
jury
greene
county
supra
neal
delaware
supra
harm
discriminatory
jury
selection
extends
beyond
inflicted
defendant
excluded
juror
touch
entire
community
selection
procedures
purposefully
exclude
black
persons
juries
undermine
public
confidence
fairness
system
justice
see
ballard
mccray
new
york
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
discrimination
within
judicial
system
pernicious
stimulant
race
prejudice
impediment
securing
black
citizens
equal
justice
law
aims
secure
others
strauder
strauder
invalidated
state
statute
provided
white
men
serve
jurors
confident
state
law
constitution
requires
however
look
beyond
face
statute
defining
juror
qualifications
also
consider
challenged
selection
practices
afford
protection
action
state
administrative
officers
effecting
prohibited
discrimination
norris
alabama
supra
see
hernandez
texas
ex
parte
virginia
supra
thus
found
denial
equal
protection
procedures
implementing
neutral
statute
operated
exclude
persons
venire
racial
grounds
made
clear
constitution
prohibits
forms
purposeful
racial
discrimination
selection
jurors
decisions
concerned
largely
discrimination
selection
venire
principles
announced
also
forbid
discrimination
account
race
selection
petit
jury
since
fourteenth
amendment
protects
accused
throughout
proceedings
bringing
justice
hill
texas
state
may
draw
jury
lists
pursuant
neutral
procedures
resort
discrimination
stages
selection
process
avery
georgia
see
mccray
new
york
supra
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
see
also
alexander
louisiana
accordingly
component
jury
selection
process
issue
state
privilege
strike
individual
jurors
peremptory
challenges
subject
commands
equal
protection
clause
although
prosecutor
ordinarily
entitled
exercise
permitted
peremptory
challenges
reason
long
reason
related
view
concerning
outcome
case
tried
robinson
supp
mandamus
granted
sub
nom
newman
equal
protection
clause
forbids
prosecutor
challenge
potential
jurors
solely
account
race
assumption
black
jurors
group
unable
impartially
consider
state
case
black
defendant
iii
principles
announced
strauder
never
questioned
subsequent
decision
rather
called
upon
repeatedly
review
application
principles
particular
facts
recurring
question
cases
case
alleging
violation
equal
protection
clause
whether
defendant
met
burden
proving
purposeful
discrimination
part
state
whitus
georgia
hernandez
texas
supra
akins
texas
martin
texas
question
also
heart
portion
swain
alabama
reexamine
today
swain
required
decide
among
issues
whether
black
defendant
denied
equal
protection
state
exercise
peremptory
challenges
exclude
members
race
petit
jury
record
swain
showed
prosecutor
used
state
peremptory
challenges
strike
six
black
persons
included
petit
jury
venire
rejecting
defendant
claim
failure
prove
purposeful
discrimination
nonetheless
indicated
equal
protection
clause
placed
limits
state
exercise
peremptory
challenges
sought
accommodate
prosecutor
historical
privilege
peremptory
challenge
free
judicial
control
constitutional
prohibition
exclusion
persons
jury
service
account
race
constitution
confer
right
peremptory
challenges
citing
stilson
challenges
traditionally
viewed
one
means
assuring
selection
qualified
unbiased
jury
preserve
peremptory
nature
prosecutor
challenge
swain
declined
scrutinize
actions
particular
case
relying
presumption
properly
exercised
state
challenges
went
observe
however
state
may
exercise
challenges
contravention
equal
protection
clause
impermissible
prosecutor
use
challenges
exclude
blacks
jury
reasons
wholly
unrelated
outcome
particular
case
trial
deny
blacks
right
opportunity
participate
administration
justice
enjoyed
white
population
accordingly
black
defendant
make
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
proof
peremptory
challenge
system
perverted
manner
ibid
example
inference
purposeful
discrimination
raised
evidence
prosecutor
case
case
whatever
circumstances
whatever
crime
whoever
defendant
victim
may
responsible
removal
negroes
selected
qualified
jurors
jury
commissioners
survived
challenges
cause
result
negroes
ever
serve
petit
juries
evidence
offered
defendant
swain
meet
standard
defendant
showed
prosecutors
jurisdiction
exercised
strikes
exclude
blacks
jury
offered
proof
circumstances
prosecutors
responsible
striking
black
jurors
beyond
facts
case
number
lower
courts
following
teaching
swain
reasoned
proof
repeated
striking
blacks
number
cases
necessary
establish
violation
equal
protection
clause
since
interpretation
swain
placed
defendants
crippling
burden
proof
prosecutors
peremptory
challenges
largely
immune
constitutional
scrutiny
reasons
follow
reject
evidentiary
formulation
inconsistent
standards
developed
since
swain
assessing
prima
facie
case
equal
protection
clause
since
decision
swain
explained
cases
concerning
selection
venire
reflect
general
equal
protection
principle
invidious
quality
governmental
action
claimed
racially
discriminatory
must
ultimately
traced
racially
discriminatory
purpose
washington
davis
equal
protection
case
burden
course
defendant
alleges
discriminatory
selection
venire
prove
existence
purposeful
discrimination
whitus
georgia
citing
tarrance
florida
deciding
defendant
carried
burden
persuasion
must
undertake
sensitive
inquiry
circumstantial
direct
evidence
intent
may
available
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
circumstantial
evidence
invidious
intent
may
include
proof
disproportionate
impact
washington
davis
observed
circumstances
proof
discriminatory
impact
may
practical
purposes
demonstrate
unconstitutionality
various
circumstances
discrimination
difficult
explain
grounds
ibid
example
total
seriously
disproportionate
exclusion
negroes
jury
venires
unequal
application
law
show
intentional
discrimination
quoting
akins
texas
moreover
since
swain
recognized
black
defendant
alleging
members
race
impermissibly
excluded
venire
may
make
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
showing
totality
relevant
facts
gives
rise
inference
discriminatory
purpose
washington
davis
supra
defendant
makes
requisite
showing
burden
shifts
state
explain
adequately
racial
exclusion
alexander
louisiana
state
meet
burden
mere
general
assertions
officials
discriminate
properly
performed
official
duties
see
alexander
louisiana
supra
jones
georgia
rather
state
must
demonstrate
permissible
racially
neutral
selection
criteria
procedures
produced
monochromatic
result
alexander
louisiana
supra
see
washington
davis
supra
showing
necessary
establish
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
selection
venire
may
discerned
decisions
castaneda
partida
alexander
louisiana
supra
defendant
initially
must
show
member
racial
group
capable
singled
differential
treatment
castaneda
partida
supra
combination
evidence
defendant
may
make
prima
facie
case
proving
particular
jurisdiction
members
race
summoned
jury
service
extended
period
time
proof
systematic
exclusion
venire
raises
inference
purposeful
discrimination
result
bespeaks
discrimination
hernandez
texas
see
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
supra
since
ultimate
issue
whether
state
discriminated
selecting
defendant
venire
however
defendant
may
establish
prima
facie
case
ways
evidence
unexplained
absence
members
race
many
panels
cassell
texas
plurality
opinion
cases
involving
venire
found
prima
facie
case
proof
members
defendant
race
substantially
underrepresented
venire
jury
drawn
venire
selected
practice
providing
opportunity
discrimination
whitus
georgia
supra
see
castaneda
partida
supra
washington
davis
supra
alexander
louisiana
supra
combination
factors
raises
necessary
inference
purposeful
discrimination
declined
attribute
chance
absence
black
citizens
particular
jury
array
selection
mechanism
subject
abuse
circumstances
suggest
need
trial
must
undertake
factual
inquiry
takes
account
possible
explanatory
factors
particular
case
alexander
louisiana
supra
thus
since
decision
swain
recognized
defendant
may
make
prima
facie
showing
purposeful
racial
discrimination
selection
venire
relying
solely
facts
concerning
selection
case
decisions
accordance
proposition
articulated
arlington
heights
metropolitan
housing
development
consistent
pattern
official
racial
discrimination
necessary
predicate
violation
equal
protection
clause
single
invidiously
discriminatory
governmental
act
immunized
absence
discrimination
making
comparable
decisions
evidentiary
requirements
dictate
several
must
suffer
discrimination
one
object
mccray
new
york
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
inconsistent
promise
equal
protection
standards
assessing
prima
facie
case
context
discriminatory
selection
venire
fully
articulated
since
swain
see
castaneda
partida
supra
washington
davis
alexander
louisiana
supra
principles
support
conclusion
defendant
may
establish
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
selection
petit
jury
solely
evidence
concerning
prosecutor
exercise
peremptory
challenges
defendant
trial
establish
case
defendant
first
must
show
member
cognizable
racial
group
castaneda
partida
supra
prosecutor
exercised
peremptory
challenges
remove
venire
members
defendant
race
second
defendant
entitled
rely
fact
dispute
peremptory
challenges
constitute
jury
selection
practice
permits
discriminate
mind
discriminate
avery
georgia
finally
defendant
must
show
facts
relevant
circumstances
raise
inference
prosecutor
used
practice
exclude
veniremen
petit
jury
account
race
combination
factors
empaneling
petit
jury
selection
venire
raises
necessary
inference
purposeful
discrimination
deciding
whether
defendant
made
requisite
showing
trial
consider
relevant
circumstances
example
pattern
strikes
black
jurors
included
particular
venire
might
give
rise
inference
discrimination
similarly
prosecutor
questions
statements
voir
dire
examination
exercising
challenges
may
support
refute
inference
discriminatory
purpose
examples
merely
illustrative
confidence
trial
judges
experienced
supervising
voir
dire
able
decide
circumstances
concerning
prosecutor
use
peremptory
challenges
creates
prima
facie
case
discrimination
black
jurors
defendant
makes
prima
facie
showing
burden
shifts
state
come
forward
neutral
explanation
challenging
black
jurors
though
requirement
imposes
limitation
cases
full
peremptory
character
historic
challenge
emphasize
prosecutor
explanation
need
rise
level
justifying
exercise
challenge
cause
see
mccray
abrams
booker
jabe
cert
pending
prosecutor
may
rebut
defendant
prima
facie
case
discrimination
stating
merely
challenged
jurors
defendant
race
assumption
intuitive
judgment
partial
defendant
shared
race
cf
norris
alabama
see
thompson
brennan
dissenting
denial
certiorari
equal
protection
clause
forbids
exclude
black
persons
venire
assumption
blacks
group
unqualified
serve
jurors
supra
forbids
strike
black
veniremen
assumption
biased
particular
case
simply
defendant
black
core
guarantee
equal
protection
ensuring
citizens
state
discriminate
account
race
meaningless
approve
exclusion
jurors
basis
assumptions
arise
solely
jurors
race
may
prosecutor
rebut
defendant
case
merely
denying
discriminatory
motive
affirm
ing
good
faith
making
individual
selections
alexander
louisiana
general
assertions
accepted
rebutting
defendant
prima
facie
case
equal
protection
clause
vain
illusory
requirement
norris
alabama
supra
prosecutor
therefore
must
articulate
neutral
explanation
related
particular
case
tried
trial
duty
determine
defendant
established
purposeful
discrimination
iv
state
contends
holding
eviscerate
fair
trial
values
served
peremptory
challenge
conceding
constitution
guarantee
right
peremptory
challenges
swain
state
use
ultimately
subject
strictures
equal
protection
state
argues
privilege
unfettered
exercise
challenge
vital
importance
criminal
justice
system
recognize
course
peremptory
challenge
occupies
important
position
trial
procedures
agree
decision
today
undermine
contribution
challenge
generally
makes
administration
justice
reality
practice
amply
reflected
many
opinions
shows
challenge
may
unfortunately
times
used
discriminate
black
jurors
requiring
trial
courts
sensitive
racially
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
decision
enforces
mandate
equal
protection
furthers
ends
justice
view
heterogeneous
population
nation
public
respect
criminal
justice
system
rule
law
strengthened
ensure
citizen
disqualified
jury
service
race
persuaded
state
suggestion
holding
create
serious
administrative
difficulties
applying
version
evidentiary
standard
recognize
today
courts
experienced
serious
administrative
burdens
peremptory
challenge
system
survived
decline
however
formulate
particular
procedures
followed
upon
defendant
timely
objection
prosecutor
challenges
case
petitioner
made
timely
objection
prosecutor
removal
black
persons
venire
trial
flatly
rejected
objection
without
requiring
prosecutor
give
explanation
action
remand
case
proceedings
trial
decides
facts
establish
prima
facie
purposeful
discrimination
prosecutor
come
forward
neutral
explanation
action
precedents
require
petitioner
conviction
reversed
whitus
georgia
hernandez
texas
patton
mississippi
ordered
footnotes
kentucky
rules
criminal
procedure
authorize
trial
permit
counsel
conduct
voir
dire
examination
conduct
examination
rule
crim
proc
jurors
excused
cause
parties
exercise
peremptory
challenges
simultaneously
striking
names
list
qualified
jurors
equal
number
seated
plus
number
allowable
peremptory
challenges
rule
since
offense
charged
case
felony
alternate
juror
called
prosecutor
entitled
six
peremptory
challenges
defense
counsel
nine
rule
see
strauder
west
virginia
neal
delaware
norris
alabama
hollins
oklahoma
per
curiam
pierre
louisiana
patton
mississippi
avery
georgia
hernandez
texas
whitus
georgia
jones
georgia
per
curiam
carter
jury
greene
county
castaneda
partida
rose
mitchell
vasquez
hillery
basic
principles
prohibiting
exclusion
persons
participation
jury
service
account
race
essentially
grand
juries
petit
juries
alexander
louisiana
see
norris
alabama
supra
principles
reinforced
criminal
laws
petitioner
argued
prosecutor
conduct
violated
rights
sixth
fourteenth
amendments
impartial
jury
jury
drawn
cross
section
community
petitioner
framed
argument
terms
apparent
effort
avoid
inviting
directly
reconsider
one
precedents
hand
state
insisted
petitioner
claiming
denial
equal
protection
must
reconsider
swain
find
constitutional
violation
record
agree
state
resolution
petitioner
claim
properly
turns
application
equal
protection
principles
express
view
merits
petitioner
sixth
amendment
arguments
see
hernandez
texas
supra
cassell
texas
plurality
opinion
akins
texas
martin
texas
neal
delaware
supra
similarly
though
sixth
amendment
guarantees
petit
jury
selected
pool
names
representing
cross
section
community
taylor
louisiana
never
held
sixth
amendment
requires
petit
juries
actually
chosen
must
mirror
community
reflect
various
distinctive
groups
population
indeed
impossible
apply
concept
proportional
representation
petit
jury
view
heterogeneous
nature
society
impossibility
illustrated
holding
jury
six
persons
unconstitutional
williams
florida
see
hernandez
texas
supra
cassell
texas
supra
akins
texas
supra
neal
delaware
supra
see
taylor
louisiana
supra
williams
florida
supra
see
also
powell
jury
trial
crimes
lee
rev
duncan
louisiana
decided
swain
concluded
right
trial
jury
criminal
cases
fundamental
feature
american
system
justice
protected
state
action
due
process
clause
fourteenth
amendment
emphasized
defendant
right
tried
jury
peers
designed
prevent
oppression
government
jury
perform
intended
function
check
official
power
must
body
drawn
community
glasser
compromising
representative
quality
jury
discriminatory
selection
procedures
make
juries
ready
weapons
officials
oppress
accused
individuals
chance
numbered
among
unpopular
inarticulate
minorities
akins
texas
supra
murphy
dissenting
blackstone
commentaries
cooley
ed
quoted
duncan
louisiana
sims
georgia
per
curiam
whitus
georgia
avery
georgia
see
norris
alabama
martin
texas
neal
delaware
express
views
whether
constitution
imposes
limit
exercise
peremptory
challenges
defense
counsel
express
views
techniques
used
lawyers
seek
obtain
information
community
case
tried
members
venire
jury
likely
drawn
see
generally
van
dyke
jury
selection
procedures
uncertain
commitment
representative
panels
prior
voir
dire
examination
serves
basis
exercise
challenges
lawyers
wish
know
much
possible
prospective
jurors
including
age
education
employment
economic
status
ensure
selection
jurors
least
open
mind
case
jurisdictions
pool
jurors
serves
substantial
period
time
see
counsel
also
may
seek
learn
members
pool
served
juries
cases
outcome
cases
counsel
even
may
employ
professional
investigators
interview
persons
served
particular
petit
jury
occasion
consider
particularly
practice
course
counsel
effort
obtain
possibly
relevant
information
prospective
jurors
distinguished
practice
issue
see
vasquez
hillery
rose
mitchell
castaneda
partida
alexander
louisiana
whitus
georgia
supra
swain
alabama
coleman
alabama
norris
alabama
supra
neal
delaware
supra
decision
swain
subject
extensive
commentary
authors
argued
reconsider
decision
van
dyke
supra
imlay
federal
jury
reformation
saving
democratic
institution
loyola
la
rev
kuhn
jury
discrimination
next
phase
cal
rev
note
rethinking
limitations
peremptory
challenge
colum
rev
note
peremptory
challenge
systematic
exclusion
prospective
jurors
basis
race
miss
comment
swain
alabama
constitutional
blueprint
perpetuation
jury
rev
see
also
johnson
black
innocence
white
jury
rev
hand
commentators
argued
adhere
swain
see
saltzburg
powers
peremptory
challenges
clash
impartiality
group
representation
md
rev
swain
reviewed
old
credentials
peremptory
challenge
system
noted
long
widely
held
belief
peremptory
challenge
necessary
part
trial
jury
see
jenkins
boykin
pearson
thigpen
state
app
jackson
state
ark
johnson
state
md
app
state
johnson
super
per
curiam
state
shaw
see
mccray
abrams
lower
courts
noted
practical
difficulties
proving
state
systematically
exercised
peremptory
challenges
exclude
blacks
jury
account
race
appeals
fifth
circuit
observed
defendant
investigate
number
cases
race
persons
tried
particular
jurisdiction
racial
composition
venire
petit
jury
manner
parties
exercised
peremptory
challenges
pearson
believed
burden
difficult
meet
ibid
jurisdictions
records
reflect
jurors
race
voir
dire
proceedings
transcribed
burden
insurmountable
see
people
wheeler
cal
decisions
concerning
disparate
treatment
title
vii
civil
rights
act
explained
operation
prima
facie
burden
proof
rules
see
mcdonnell
douglas
green
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
postal
service
board
governors
aikens
party
alleging
victim
intentional
discrimination
carries
ultimate
burden
persuasion
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
supra
decisions
title
vii
also
recognize
person
claiming
victim
intentional
discrimination
may
make
prima
facie
case
relying
solely
facts
concerning
alleged
discrimination
see
cases
supra
appeals
second
circuit
observed
mccray
abrams
number
bases
prosecutor
reasonably
may
believe
desirable
strike
juror
excusable
cause
explained
another
context
however
prosecutor
must
give
clear
reasonably
specific
explanation
legitimate
reasons
exercising
challenges
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdime
recent
title
vii
sex
discrimination
case
stated
finding
intentional
discrimination
finding
fact
entitled
appropriate
deference
reviewing
anderson
bessemer
city
since
trial
judge
findings
context
consideration
largely
turn
evaluation
credibility
reviewing
ordinarily
give
findings
great
deference
respect
views
expressed
justice
marshall
concurring
opinion
concerning
prosecutorial
judicial
enforcement
holding
today
share
standard
adopt
federal
constitution
designed
ensure
state
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
black
juror
race
reason
believe
prosecutors
fulfill
duty
exercise
challenges
legitimate
purposes
certainly
may
assume
trial
judges
supervising
voir
dire
light
decision
today
alert
identify
prima
facie
case
purposeful
discrimination
think
historic
trial
practice
long
served
selection
impartial
jury
abolished
apprehension
prosecutors
trial
judges
perform
conscientiously
respective
duties
constitution
example
people
hall
cal
california
found
evidence
show
procedures
implementing
version
standard
imposed
five
years
earlier
burdensome
trial
judges
light
variety
jury
selection
practices
followed
state
federal
trial
courts
make
attempt
instruct
courts
best
implement
holding
today
reason
express
view
whether
appropriate
particular
case
upon
finding
discrimination
black
jurors
trial
discharge
venire
select
new
jury
panel
previously
associated
case
see
booker
jabe
disallow
discriminatory
challenges
resume
selection
improperly
challenged
jurors
reinstated
venire
see
robinson
supp
mandamus
granted
sub
nom
newman
extent
anything
swain
alabama
contrary
principles
articulate
today
decision
overruled
justice
white
concurring
overturns
principal
holding
swain
alabama
constitution
require
given
case
inquiry
prosecutor
reasons
using
peremptory
challenges
strike
blacks
petit
jury
panel
criminal
trial
black
defendant
case
presumed
prosecutor
acting
legitimate
reasons
rules
use
peremptory
challenges
given
case
may
necessarily
raise
inference
prosecutor
carries
burden
refuting
strikes
based
belief
black
citizen
satisfactory
juror
fairly
try
black
defendant
agree
extent
swain
overruled
swain
indicated
presumption
legitimacy
respect
striking
black
venire
persons
overcome
evidence
period
time
prosecution
consistently
excluded
blacks
petit
juries
warned
prosecutors
using
peremptories
exclude
blacks
assumption
black
juror
fairly
judge
black
defendant
violate
equal
protection
clause
appears
however
practice
peremptorily
eliminating
blacks
petit
juries
cases
black
defendants
remains
widespread
much
agree
opportunity
inquire
afforded
occurs
defendant
objects
judge
puts
considerable
trust
may
determine
prosecution
must
respond
persuaded
otherwise
judge
may
conclude
challenges
rest
belief
blacks
fairly
try
black
defendant
effect
attributes
prosecutor
view
blacks
eliminated
entire
venire
hence
prior
cases
dealing
jury
venires
rather
petit
juries
without
relevance
case
emphasizes
using
peremptory
challenges
strike
blacks
end
inquiry
unconstitutional
without
strike
one
blacks
jury
judge
may
require
prosecutor
respond
prosecutor
cases
chance
voir
dire
prospective
jurors
opportunity
give
reasons
strikes
satisfactory
ground
belief
black
jurors
allowed
judge
black
defendant
much
litigation
required
spell
contours
equal
protection
holding
today
significant
effect
conduct
criminal
trials
gainsaid
agree
time
come
rule
join
opinion
judgment
however
adhere
rule
announced
destefano
woods
duncan
louisiana
held
deny
jury
trials
serious
criminal
cases
require
reversal
state
conviction
failure
grant
jury
trial
trial
began
prior
date
announcement
duncan
decision
result
reached
destefano
respect
retroactivity
bloom
illinois
daniel
louisiana
per
curiam
respect
decision
taylor
louisiana
holding
systematic
exclusion
women
jury
panels
violated
sixth
fourteenth
amendments
inconsistent
swain
trial
judge
invalidate
peremptory
challenges
blacks
prosecutor
response
objection
strikes
stated
struck
blacks
believed
qualified
serve
jurors
especially
trial
black
defendant
justice
marshall
concurring
join
justice
powell
eloquent
opinion
takes
historic
step
toward
eliminating
shameful
practice
racial
discrimination
selection
juries
opinion
cogently
explains
pernicious
nature
racially
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
repugnancy
discrimination
equal
protection
clause
opinion
also
ably
demonstrates
inadequacy
burden
proof
racially
discriminatory
use
peremptories
requires
justice
sit
supinely
flouted
case
case
remedy
available
nonetheless
write
separately
express
views
decision
today
end
racial
discrimination
peremptories
inject
process
goal
accomplished
eliminating
peremptory
challenges
entirely
little
century
ago
invalidated
state
statute
providing
black
citizens
serve
jurors
strauder
west
virginia
state
officials
turned
somewhat
subtle
ways
keeping
blacks
jury
venires
see
swain
alabama
goldberg
dissenting
kuhn
jury
discrimination
next
phase
cal
rev
see
also
van
dyke
jury
selection
procedures
uncertain
commitment
representative
panels
hereinafter
van
dyke
although
means
used
exclude
blacks
changed
pernicious
consequence
continued
misuse
peremptory
challenge
exclude
black
jurors
become
common
flagrant
black
defendants
rarely
able
compile
statistics
showing
extent
practice
cases
setting
figures
instructive
see
carter
criminal
cases
western
district
missouri
involving
black
defendants
prosecutors
peremptorily
challenged
black
jurors
cert
denied
mcdaniels
supp
ed
la
criminal
cases
eastern
district
louisiana
involving
black
defendants
federal
prosecutors
used
peremptory
challenges
black
jurors
made
less
venire
mckinney
walker
supp
sc
criminal
trials
spartansburg
county
south
carolina
involving
black
defendants
prosecutors
peremptorily
challenged
black
jurors
affirmance
order
prosecutors
explained
courts
routinely
strike
black
jurors
see
state
washington
la
instruction
book
used
prosecutor
office
dallas
county
texas
explicitly
advised
prosecutors
conduct
jury
selection
eliminate
member
minority
group
felony
trials
dallas
county
prosecutors
peremptorily
struck
eligible
black
jurors
chance
qualified
black
sitting
jury
compared
white
discussion
utter
unconstitutionality
practice
needs
amplification
explained
century
ago
selection
jurors
pass
upon
defendant
life
liberty
property
shall
exclusion
race
discrimination
color
neal
delaware
quoting
virginia
rives
justice
rehnquist
dissenting
concedes
exclusion
blacks
jury
solely
black
best
based
upon
crudely
stereotypical
many
cases
hopelessly
mistaken
notions
post
yet
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
state
taking
action
based
crude
inaccurate
racial
stereotypes
even
action
serve
state
interests
exclusion
blacks
jury
solely
race
justified
belief
blacks
less
likely
whites
consider
fairly
sympathetically
state
case
black
defendant
justified
notion
blacks
lack
intelligence
experience
moral
integrity
neal
supra
entrusted
role
ii
wholeheartedly
concur
conclusion
use
peremptory
challenge
remove
blacks
juries
basis
race
violates
equal
protection
clause
go
however
fashioning
remedy
adequate
eliminate
discrimination
merely
allowing
defendants
opportunity
challenge
racially
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
individual
cases
end
illegitimate
use
peremptory
challenge
evidentiary
analysis
similar
set
ante
adopted
matter
state
law
including
massachusetts
california
cases
jurisdictions
illustrate
limitations
approach
first
defendants
attack
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
unless
challenges
flagrant
establish
prima
facie
case
means
one
two
black
jurors
survive
challenges
cause
prosecutor
need
compunction
striking
jury
race
see
commonwealth
robinson
mass
prima
facie
case
discrimination
defendant
black
prospective
jurors
include
three
blacks
one
puerto
rican
prosecutor
excludes
one
cause
strikes
remainder
peremptorily
producing
jury
people
rousseau
cal
app
cal
rptr
prima
facie
case
prosecutor
peremptorily
strikes
two
blacks
jury
panel
prosecutors
left
free
discriminate
blacks
jury
selection
provided
hold
discrimination
acceptable
level
second
defendant
establish
prima
facie
case
trial
courts
face
difficult
burden
assessing
prosecutors
motives
see
king
county
nassau
supp
edny
prosecutor
easily
assert
facially
neutral
reasons
striking
juror
trial
courts
ill
equipped
reasons
treat
prosecutor
statement
struck
juror
juror
son
age
defendant
see
people
hall
cal
seemed
uncommunicative
king
supra
never
cracked
smile
therefore
possess
sensitivities
necessary
realistically
look
issues
decide
facts
case
hall
supra
easily
generated
explanations
sufficient
discharge
prosecutor
obligation
justify
strikes
nonracial
grounds
protection
erected
today
may
illusory
outright
prevarication
prosecutors
danger
even
possible
attorney
may
lie
effort
convince
motives
legal
king
supra
prosecutor
conscious
unconscious
racism
may
lead
easily
conclusion
prospective
black
juror
sullen
distant
characterization
come
mind
white
juror
acted
identically
judge
conscious
unconscious
racism
may
lead
accept
explanation
well
supported
justice
rehnquist
concedes
prosecutors
peremptories
based
instincts
particular
jurors
vote
post
see
also
chief
justice
dissenting
opinion
post
yet
instincts
may
often
another
term
racial
prejudice
even
parties
approach
mandate
best
conscious
intentions
mandate
requires
confront
overcome
racism
levels
challenge
doubt
meet
worth
remembering
years
close
war
nearly
years
strauder
racial
forms
discrimination
still
remain
fact
life
administration
justice
society
whole
rose
mitchell
quoted
vasquez
hillery
iii
inherent
potential
peremptory
challenges
distort
jury
process
permitting
exclusion
jurors
racial
grounds
ideally
lead
ban
entirely
criminal
justice
system
see
van
dyke
imlay
federal
jury
reformation
saving
democratic
institution
loyola
la
rev
justice
goldberg
dissenting
swain
emphasized
ere
necessary
make
absolute
choice
right
defendant
jury
chosen
conformity
requirements
fourteenth
amendment
right
challenge
peremptorily
constitution
compels
choice
former
believe
case
presents
choice
resolve
choice
eliminating
peremptory
challenges
entirely
criminal
cases
authors
suggested
courts
ban
prosecutors
peremptories
entirely
zealously
guard
defendant
peremptory
essential
fairness
trial
jury
lewis
one
important
rights
secured
accused
pointer
see
van
dyke
brown
mcguire
winters
peremptory
challenge
manipulative
device
criminal
trials
traditional
use
abuse
new
england
rev
find
acceptable
solution
criminal
justice
system
requires
freedom
bias
accused
also
prejudice
prosecution
state
scales
evenly
held
hayes
missouri
maintain
balance
permitting
prosecutor
defendant
engage
racial
discrimination
jury
selection
banning
use
peremptory
challenges
prosecutors
allowing
eliminate
defendant
peremptories
well
much
ink
spilled
regarding
historic
importance
defendants
peremptory
challenges
approving
comments
lewis
pointer
courts
noted
swain
emphasized
old
credentials
peremptory
challenge
cited
long
widely
held
belief
peremptory
challenge
necessary
part
trial
jury
also
repeatedly
stated
right
peremptory
challenge
constitutional
magnitude
may
withheld
altogether
without
impairing
constitutional
guarantee
impartial
jury
fair
trial
frazier
wood
stilson
see
also
swain
potential
racial
prejudice
inheres
defendant
challenge
well
prosecutor
peremptory
challenge
eliminated
cost
eliminating
defendant
challenge
well
think
great
price
pay
applaud
holding
racially
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
violates
equal
protection
clause
join
opinion
however
banning
peremptories
entirely
discrimination
ended
commonwealth
martin
nix
dissenting
quoted
mccray
new
york
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
see
also
harris
texas
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
williams
illinois
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
van
dyke
quoting
texas
observer
may
earlier
treatise
circulated
county
instructed
prosecutors
take
jews
negroes
dagos
mexicans
member
minority
race
jury
matter
rich
well
educated
quoted
dallas
morning
news
mar
see
also
comment
case
study
peremptory
challenge
subtle
strike
equal
protection
due
process
louis
justice
stevens
justice
brennan
joins
concurring
dissenting
opinion
chief
justice
correctly
identifies
apparent
inconsistency
criticism
action
colorado
connelly
memorandum
brennan
joined
stevens
new
jersey
stevens
dissenting
cases
directed
state
brief
argue
questions
presented
petition
certiorari
action
today
finding
violation
equal
protection
clause
despite
failure
petitioner
counsel
rely
ground
decision
post
nn
case
however
unlike
connelly
party
defending
judgment
explicitly
rested
issue
question
controlling
basis
affirmance
defending
kentucky
judgment
kentucky
assistant
attorney
general
emphasized
state
position
centrality
equal
protection
issue
chief
justice
may
please
issue
today
simply
whether
swain
versus
alabama
reaffirmed
believe
fourteenth
amendment
item
challenged
presents
perhaps
address
problem
swain
dealt
primarily
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
individuals
cognizable
identifiable
group
petitioners
show
case
state
california
case
dealing
use
peremptories
wherein
sixth
amendment
cited
authority
resolving
problem
believe
fourteenth
amendment
indeed
issue
guts
primarily
basic
concern
swain
closing
believe
trial
kentucky
kentucky
firmly
embraced
swain
respectfully
request
affirm
opinion
kentucky
well
reaffirm
swain
versus
alabama
petitioner
establish
deprived
properly
constituted
petit
jury
denied
equal
protection
laws
swain
alabama
defendant
establish
equal
protection
violation
showing
black
veniremen
subjected
peremptory
challenge
prosecution
case
circumstances
although
suppose
possible
reargument
might
enable
us
better
informed
view
problem
percolating
courts
several
years
believe
acts
wisely
resolving
issue
basis
arguments
already
fully
presented
without
special
invitation
tr
oral
arg
brief
amicus
curiae
argument
section
brief
national
district
attorneys
association
amicus
curiae
support
respondent
begins
follows
conclude
prosecutorial
peremptory
challenges
exercised
case
proper
fourteenth
amendment
equal
protection
clause
sixth
amendment
determine
constitutional
need
change
otherwise
modify
decision
swain
alabama
see
mccray
new
york
opinion
stevens
respecting
denial
certiorari
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
eventual
federal
habeas
corpus
disposition
mccray
course
proved
one
landmark
cases
made
issues
case
ripe
review
mccray
abrams
cert
pending
see
also
pet
cert
relying
heavily
mccray
reason
review
mccray
almost
opinions
considered
similar
challenges
appeals
second
circuit
explicitly
addressed
equal
protection
issue
viability
swain
pending
petition
certiorari
mccray
similarly
raises
equal
protection
question
long
central
issue
pet
cert
question
indeed
shortly
agreeing
hear
batson
presented
motion
consolidate
mccray
batson
consider
cases
together
presumably
believed
batson
adequately
presented
issues
courts
consistently
grappled
considering
question
denied
motion
see
abrams
mccray
cf
ibid
brennan
marshall
stevens
dissenting
denial
motion
consolidate
although
disagree
criticism
case
fully
subscribe
chief
justice
view
expressed
today
address
issues
necessary
disposition
case
petition
contrasting
views
see
bender
williamsport
area
school
burger
dissenting
addressing
merits
even
though
majority
found
lack
standing
colorado
nunez
concurring
opinion
joined
burger
expressing
view
merits
even
though
writ
dismissed
improvidently
granted
judgment
rested
adequate
independent
state
grounds
florida
casal
burger
concurring
agreeing
writ
dismissed
improvidently
granted
judgment
rested
adequate
independent
state
grounds
noting
citizens
state
must
aware
power
amend
state
law
ensure
rational
law
enforcement
see
also
colorado
connelly
ordering
parties
address
issue
neither
party
raised
new
jersey
justice
concurring
concur
opinion
judgment
also
agree
views
chief
justice
justice
white
today
decision
apply
retroactively
chief
justice
burger
joined
justice
rehnquist
dissenting
granted
certiorari
decide
whether
petitioner
tried
violation
constitutional
provisions
guaranteeing
defendant
impartial
jury
jury
composed
persons
representing
fair
cross
section
community
pet
cert
today
sets
aside
peremptory
challenge
procedure
part
common
law
many
centuries
part
jury
system
nearly
years
basis
constitutional
argument
rejected
without
single
dissent
swain
alabama
reversal
settled
principles
unusual
enough
terms
three
years
ago
said
stare
decisis
perhaps
never
entirely
persuasive
constitutional
question
doctrine
demands
respect
society
governed
rule
law
akron
akron
center
reproductive
health
makes
today
holding
truly
extraordinary
based
constitutional
argument
petitioner
expressly
declined
raise
kentucky
kentucky
petitioner
disclaimed
specifically
reliance
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
pressing
instead
claim
based
sixth
amendment
see
brief
appellant
reply
brief
appellant
petitioner
explained
oral
argument
made
equal
protection
claim
made
specific
argument
briefs
filed
either
kentucky
saying
attacking
swain
tr
oral
arg
petitioner
suggested
barrier
prevented
raising
equal
protection
claim
kentucky
courts
circumstances
review
equal
protection
argument
improper
consistently
refused
decide
federal
constitutional
issues
raised
first
time
review
state
decisions
illinois
gates
stevens
dissenting
quoting
cardinale
louisiana
neither
justice
stevens
offers
justification
departing
principle
dates
owings
norwood
lessee
cranch
crowell
randell
pet
even
equal
protection
issue
pressed
kentucky
surely
pressed
provides
additional
completely
separate
procedural
novelty
today
decision
petitioner
question
presented
involved
constitutional
provisions
guaranteeing
defendant
impartial
jury
jury
composed
persons
representing
fair
cross
section
community
pet
cert
provisions
found
sixth
amendment
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
relied
upon
brief
merits
heading
distinguishing
equal
protection
cases
petitioner
noted
irrelevance
swain
analysis
present
case
brief
petitioner
instead
petitioner
relied
solely
sixth
amendment
analysis
found
cases
taylor
louisiana
oral
argument
counsel
petitioner
pointedly
asked
question
niehaus
swain
equal
protection
challenge
niehaus
yes
question
claim
based
solely
sixth
amendment
niehaus
yes
question
correct
niehaus
arguing
yes
question
asking
reconsideration
swain
making
equal
protection
claim
correct
niehaus
made
equal
protection
claim
think
swain
reconsidered
certain
extent
consider
arguments
made
behalf
affirmance
respondent
solicitor
general
niehaus
made
specific
argument
briefs
filed
either
kentucky
saying
attacking
swain
tr
oral
arg
question
come
back
question
attack
swain
head
take
overrule
swain
like
result
niehaus
simply
overrule
swain
without
adopting
remedy
question
yes
niehaus
think
give
us
much
comfort
honor
question
concession
niehaus
state
action
involved
defendant
exercising
peremptory
challenge
question
might
equal
protection
challenge
state
system
allows
kind
strike
niehaus
believe
possible
really
prepared
answer
specific
question
today
rejects
accepted
courses
action
choosing
instead
reverse
unanimous
constitutional
holding
basis
constitutional
arguments
expressly
disclaimed
petitioner
explanation
action
found
justice
stevens
concurrence
justice
stevens
apparently
believes
issue
properly
party
defending
judgment
explicitly
rested
issue
question
controlling
basis
affirmance
ante
cf
illinois
gates
stevens
dissenting
impediment
presenting
new
argument
alternative
basis
affirming
decision
emphasis
original
sure
respondent
supporting
amici
cite
swain
equal
protection
clause
arguments
largely
limited
explaining
swain
placed
negative
gloss
sixth
amendment
claim
actually
raised
petitioner
event
strange
jurisprudence
looks
arguments
made
respondent
determine
breadth
questions
presented
review
petitioner
course
view
directly
odds
rule
provides
nly
questions
set
forth
petition
fairly
included
therein
considered
justice
stevens
cite
aware
case
nearly
history
alternative
grounds
urged
respondent
affirm
judgment
seized
upon
permit
petitioner
obtain
relief
judgment
despite
petitioner
failure
urge
ground
justice
stevens
also
observes
several
amici
curiae
address
equal
protection
argument
ante
thought
well
settled
even
point
made
amicus
curiae
brief
claim
never
advanced
petitioners
reason
pass
upon
knetsch
objections
peremptory
challenges
brought
three
years
ago
justice
stevens
agreed
justice
marshall
challenge
involved
significant
recurring
question
constitutional
law
mccray
new
york
marshall
dissenting
denial
certiorari
referred
approval
opinion
stevens
respecting
denial
certiorari
nonetheless
justice
stevens
wrote
issue
dealt
wisely
later
date
conditions
exist
today
justice
stevens
concedes
reargument
case
might
enable
us
better
informed
view
problem
percolating
courts
several
years
ante
thus
bottom
position
overrule
extremely
important
prior
constitutional
decision
claim
advanced
even
though
briefing
oral
argument
claim
might
convince
us
otherwise
believe
ecisions
made
manner
unlikely
withstand
test
time
leon
stevens
dissenting
contemplating
holding
least
direct
reargument
briefing
issue
whether
equal
protection
holding
swain
reconsidered
ii
nonetheless
chooses
decide
case
equal
protection
grounds
presented
may
useful
discuss
issue
well
acknowledges
albeit
old
credentials
peremptory
challenge
widely
held
belief
peremptory
challenge
necessary
part
trial
jury
ante
quoting
swain
proper
resolution
case
requires
nodding
reference
purpose
challenge
long
ago
recognized
right
challenge
almost
essential
purpose
securing
perfect
fairness
impartiality
trial
forsyth
history
trial
jury
peremptory
challenge
use
without
scrutiny
basis
nearly
long
juries
existed
use
amongst
romans
criminal
cases
lex
servilia
enacted
accuser
accused
severally
propose
one
hundred
judices
might
reject
fifty
list
one
hundred
remain
try
alleged
crime
ibid
see
also
pettingal
enquiry
use
practice
juries
among
greeks
romans
swain
justice
white
traced
development
peremptory
challenge
early
days
jury
trial
england
trials
felonies
common
law
defendant
allowed
challenge
peremptorily
jurors
prosecutor
originally
right
challenge
number
jurors
without
cause
right
said
tend
infinite
delayes
danger
coke
littleton
ed
thus
ordinance
inquests
edw
stat
provided
sue
king
challenge
jurors
shall
assign
cause
certain
persistent
view
proper
jury
trial
required
peremptories
sides
however
statute
construed
allow
prosecution
direct
juror
examination
stand
aside
entire
panel
gone
defendant
exercised
challenges
deficiency
jurors
box
point
crown
show
cause
respect
jurors
recalled
make
required
number
peremptories
sides
became
settled
law
england
continuing
form
separation
colonies
footnotes
omitted
federal
system
congress
early
took
part
subject
hand
establishing
defendant
entitled
peremptories
trials
treason
trials
felonies
specified
act
punishable
death
stat
regard
trials
offenses
without
statute
defendant
government
thought
right
peremptory
challenge
although
source
right
wholly
clear
course
apparently
paralleled
federal
system
defendant
right
challenge
early
conferred
statute
number
often
corresponding
english
practice
prosecution
thought
retained
crown
right
stand
aside
enacted
statutes
conferring
prosecution
substantial
number
peremptory
challenges
number
generally
least
half
often
equal
number
defendant
footnotes
omitted
function
challenge
eliminate
extremes
partiality
sides
assure
parties
jurors
try
case
decide
basis
evidence
placed
otherwise
way
peremptory
satisfies
rule
perform
high
function
best
way
justice
must
satisfy
appearance
justice
quoting
murchison
peremptory
made
without
giving
reason
avoids
trafficking
core
truth
common
stereotypes
common
human
experience
common
sense
psychosociological
studies
public
opinion
polls
tell
us
likely
certain
classes
people
statistically
predispositions
make
inappropriate
jurors
particular
kinds
cases
allow
knowledge
expressed
evaluative
terms
necessary
challenges
cause
undercut
desire
society
people
judged
individuals
held
reasonable
open
compromise
example
lthough
experience
reveals
black
males
class
biased
young
alienated
blacks
tried
join
middle
class
enunciate
concrete
expression
required
challenge
cause
societally
divisive
instead
evolved
peremptory
challenge
system
allows
covert
expression
dare
say
know
true
often
babcock
voir
dire
preserving
wonderful
power
stan
rev
instead
even
considering
history
function
peremptory
challenge
bulk
opinion
spent
recounting
principle
intentional
exclusion
racial
groups
jury
venires
violation
equal
protection
clause
reaffirm
principle
part
constitutional
tradition
since
least
strauder
west
virginia
today
decision
nothing
mere
application
principles
announced
strauder
maintains
ante
consider
curious
application
went
unrecognized
century
swain
difficulty
unanimously
concluding
cases
strauder
require
inquiry
basis
peremptory
challenge
see
post
rehnquist
dissenting
recently
held
efendants
entitled
jury
particular
composition
taylor
louisiana
moment
reflection
quickly
reveals
vast
differences
racial
exclusions
involved
strauder
allegations
us
today
exclusion
venire
summons
process
implies
government
usually
legislative
judicial
branch
made
general
determination
excluded
unfit
try
case
exercise
peremptory
challenge
contrast
represents
discrete
decision
made
one
two
opposed
litigants
trial
phase
adversary
system
justice
challenged
venireperson
likely
unfavorable
litigant
particular
case
others
venire
thus
excluding
particular
cognizable
group
venire
pools
stigmatizing
discriminatory
several
interrelated
ways
peremptory
challenge
former
singles
excluded
group
individuals
groups
equally
subject
peremptory
challenge
basis
including
group
affiliation
exclusion
bespeaks
priori
total
unfitness
exclusion
merely
suggests
potential
partiality
particular
isolated
case
exclusion
venires
focuses
inherent
attributes
excluded
group
infers
inferiority
peremptory
suggest
particular
race
unfit
judge
case
necessarily
racially
insulting
suggest
race
may
special
concerns
even
may
tend
favor
leslie
en
banc
applying
conventional
equal
protection
analysis
shown
limitation
new
rule
allegations
impermissible
challenge
basis
race
opinion
clearly
contains
limitation
see
ante
establish
prima
facie
case
defendant
first
must
show
member
cognizable
racial
group
emphasis
added
ibid
inally
defendant
must
show
facts
relevant
circumstances
raise
inference
prosecutor
used
practice
exclude
veniremen
petit
jury
account
race
emphasis
added
conventional
equal
protection
principles
apply
presumably
defendants
object
exclusions
basis
race
also
sex
craig
boren
age
massachusetts
bd
retirement
murgia
religious
political
affiliation
karcher
daggett
stevens
concurring
mental
capacity
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
number
children
dandridge
williams
living
arrangements
department
agriculture
moreno
employment
particular
industry
minnesota
clover
leaf
creamery
profession
williamson
lee
optical
short
quite
probable
every
peremptory
challenge
objected
basis
excluded
venireman
characteristic
shared
remaining
members
venire
constituted
classification
subject
equal
protection
scrutiny
see
mccray
abrams
meskill
dissenting
cert
pending
compounding
difficulties
conventional
equal
protection
principles
uses
peremptories
reviewed
strict
scrutiny
sustained
suitably
tailored
serve
compelling
state
interest
cleburne
others
reviewed
determine
substantially
related
sufficiently
important
government
interest
still
others
reviewed
determine
whether
rational
means
serve
legitimate
end
id
never
applies
conventional
equal
protection
framework
claims
hand
perhaps
avoid
acknowledging
state
interest
involved
historically
regarded
substantial
compelling
peremptory
challenges
long
viewed
means
achieve
impartial
jury
sympathetic
toward
neither
accused
witnesses
state
basis
shared
factor
race
religion
occupation
characteristic
nearly
century
ago
stated
peremptory
challenge
essential
fairness
trial
jury
lewis
conventional
equal
protection
principles
state
interest
magnitude
ancient
lineage
might
well
overcome
equal
protection
objection
application
peremptory
challenges
however
silent
strength
state
interest
apparently
leaving
issue
among
many
others
litigation
required
spell
contours
equal
protection
holding
today
ante
white
concurring
also
purports
express
views
whether
constitution
imposes
limit
exercise
peremptory
challenges
defense
counsel
ante
emphasis
added
clear
inescapable
import
novel
holding
inevitably
limit
use
valuable
tool
prosecutors
defense
attorneys
alike
held
prosecutors
limited
use
peremptory
challenges
rationally
hold
defendants
criminal
justice
system
requires
freedom
bias
accused
also
prejudice
prosecution
state
scales
evenly
held
ante
marshall
concurring
quoting
hayes
missouri
rather
applying
straightforward
equal
protection
analysis
substitutes
holding
swain
curious
hybrid
defendant
must
first
establish
prima
facie
case
ante
invidious
discrimination
burden
shifts
state
come
forward
neutral
explanation
challenging
black
jurors
ante
explains
operation
prima
facie
burden
proof
rules
established
ur
decisions
concerning
disparate
treatment
ante
adds
borrowing
title
vii
case
prosecutor
must
give
clear
reasonably
specific
explanation
legitimate
reasons
exercising
challenges
ante
quoting
texas
dept
community
affairs
burdine
undoubtedly
rules
well
suited
contexts
particularly
title
vii
required
act
congress
seem
curiously
place
applied
peremptory
challenges
criminal
cases
system
permits
two
types
challenges
challenges
cause
peremptory
challenges
challenges
cause
obviously
explained
definition
peremptory
challenges
called
peremptory
challenge
prisoner
may
challenge
peremptorily
dislike
without
showing
cause
joy
peremptory
challenge
jurors
emphasis
added
analytically
middle
ground
challenge
either
explained
readily
apparent
permit
inquiry
basis
peremptory
challenge
force
peremptory
challenge
collapse
challenge
cause
clark
indeed
recognized
without
dissent
swain
scrutiny
permitted
challenge
pro
tanto
longer
peremptory
every
challenge
open
examination
either
time
challenge
hearing
afterwards
swain
confronted
dilemma
created
today
attempts
decree
middle
ground
rebut
prima
facie
case
requires
neutral
explanation
challenge
pains
emphasize
explanation
need
rise
level
justifying
exercise
challenge
cause
ante
loss
discern
governing
principles
clear
reasonably
specific
explanation
legitimate
reasons
exercising
challenge
difficult
distinguish
challenge
cause
anything
short
challenge
cause
may
well
seen
arbitrary
capricious
challenge
use
blackstone
characterization
peremptory
see
blackstone
commentaries
apparently
envisions
permissible
challenges
short
challenge
cause
little
bit
arbitrary
much
trial
judges
experienced
supervising
voir
dire
ante
experience
administering
rules
like
example
quickly
demonstrate
today
holding
purporting
ends
justice
ante
effect
assume
asian
defendant
trial
capital
murder
white
victim
asks
prospective
jury
members
white
whether
harbor
racial
prejudice
asians
see
turner
murray
ante
basis
question
flush
juror
believes
asians
morally
inferior
ante
assume
white
jurors
deny
harboring
racial
prejudice
defendant
trial
life
remains
unconvinced
protestations
instead
continues
harbor
hunch
assumption
intuitive
judgment
ante
white
jurors
prejudiced
presumably
based
part
race
rule
today
peremptory
challenges
exercised
basis
explained
lewis
ow
necessary
prisoner
put
defend
life
good
opinion
jury
want
might
totally
disconcert
law
wills
tried
one
man
conceived
prejudice
even
without
able
assign
reason
dislike
painful
paradox
holding
likely
interject
racial
matters
back
jury
selection
process
contrary
general
thrust
long
line
decisions
notion
country
melting
pot
avery
georgia
instance
confronted
situation
selection
venire
done
selection
tickets
box
names
whites
printed
tickets
one
color
names
blacks
printed
different
color
tickets
difficulty
striking
scheme
justice
frankfurter
observed
opportunity
working
discriminatory
system
exists
whenever
mechanism
jury
selection
component
part
slips
differentiates
white
colored
concurring
emphasis
added
today
mark
return
racial
differentiation
accepts
positive
evil
perceived
one
prosecutors
defense
attorneys
alike
build
records
support
claims
peremptory
challenges
exercised
racially
discriminatory
fashion
asking
jurors
state
racial
background
national
origin
record
despite
fact
questions
may
offensive
jurors
thus
ordinarily
asked
voir
dire
people
motton
cal
modified
cal
advance
sheet
process
sure
tax
even
capable
counsel
judges
since
determining
whether
prima
facie
case
established
require
continued
monitoring
recording
group
composition
panel
present
prospective
people
wheeler
cal
richardson
dissenting
even
record
issue
created
disputes
inevitably
arise
one
case
instance
conviction
reversed
based
assumption
blacks
jury
convicted
defendant
see
people
motton
supra
however
decision
announced
carolyn
pritchett
served
jury
called
press
state
error
black
california
nonetheless
denied
rehearing
petition
tarry
long
difficult
sensitive
problems
preferring
instead
gloss
swiftly
slides
centuries
history
make
attempt
instruct
trial
courts
best
implement
holding
today
ante
leaves
roughly
general
jurisdiction
state
trial
judges
approximately
federal
trial
judges
large
find
way
morass
creates
today
essentially
wishes
judges
well
begin
difficult
enterprise
sorting
implications
newly
created
right
join
colleagues
wishing
nation
judges
well
struggle
grasp
implement
today
holding
mind
however
attention
implementation
questions
leads
quickly
conclusion
good
way
implement
holding
let
alone
best
way
one
apparently
frustrated
judge
explained
reviewing
case
rule
like
promulgated
today
judicial
inquiry
peremptory
challenges
case
case
take
courts
quagmire
quotas
groups
difficult
define
even
difficult
quantify
courtroom
pursuit
judicial
perfection
require
trial
appellate
courts
provide
speculative
impractical
answers
artificial
questions
holley
sweeping
cal
app
cal
rptr
holmdahl
concurring
omitted
iii
also
add
assent
justice
white
conclusion
today
decision
apply
retroactively
ante
concurring
see
also
ante
concurring
held
solem
stumes
criteria
guiding
resolution
retroactivity
question
implicate
purpose
served
new
standards
extent
reliance
law
enforcement
authorities
old
standards
effect
administration
justice
retroactive
application
new
standards
stovall
denno
sum
prior
holdings
impossible
construct
even
calorable
argument
retroactive
application
adopted
judicially
created
rules
similar
announced
today
refused
full
retroactive
application
see
people
wheeler
cal
state
neil
supra
commonwealth
soares
mass
cert
denied
therefore
persuaded
justice
white
position
ante
concurring
today
novel
decision
given
retroactive
effect
iv
institution
like
peremptory
challenge
part
fabric
jury
system
casually
cast
aside
especially
basis
raised
argued
petitioner
one
commentator
aptly
observed
real
question
whether
tinker
system
jury
selection
anything
else
done
job
centuries
stand
shoulders
ancestors
burke
said
much
past
always
worth
preserving
argued
rather
infinite
caution
man
venture
upon
pulling
edifice
answered
tolerable
degree
ages
common
purposes
society
younger
unlawful
peremptory
challenges
litigation
fall
colorado
connelly
justice
brennan
joined
justice
stevens
filed
memorandum
objecting
briefing
additional
question
explaining
hardly
second
chair
prosecutor
alter
strategy
guard
mistakes
rule
nly
questions
set
forth
petition
fairly
included
therein
considered
given
petitioner
express
disclaimer
issue
presented
question
obviously
fairly
included
question
submitted
direction
parties
address
anyway
makes
meaningless
case
provisions
rule
plainly
cause
concern
particularly
since
clear
similar
dispensation
granted
criminal
defendant
however
strong
claim
limited
step
directing
briefing
additional
point
time
certiorari
granted
cause
concern
think
fortiori
far
expansive
action
takes
today
warrant
similar
concern
justice
stevens
joined
justice
brennan
justice
marshall
dissented
order
directing
reargument
new
jersey
explained
single
question
presented
briefed
argued
evidently
unable
unwilling
decide
question
presented
parties
instead
dismissing
writ
certiorari
improvidently
granted
orders
reargument
directed
questions
petitioner
decided
bring
volunteering
unwanted
advice
rarely
wise
course
action
believe
adversary
process
functions
effectively
rely
initiative
lawyers
rather
activism
judges
fashion
questions
review
fact
alone
distinguishes
cases
cited
justice
stevens
support
today
unprecedented
action
see
ante
bender
williamsport
area
school
burger
dissenting
colorado
nunez
white
concurring
florida
casal
burger
concurring
issues
discussed
primary
issues
advanced
briefed
argued
petitioners
related
directly
basis
deciding
case
sure
discussion
separate
statements
might
parsimoniously
viewed
un
necessary
disposition
case
petition
ante
approach
many
dissenting
opinions
dissents
denial
certiorari
condemned
well
important
none
separate
statements
even
suggested
proper
overturn
judgment
issues
briefed
argued
petitioner
today
finally
colorado
connelly
new
jersey
directed
briefing
argument
particular
questions
deciding
procedure
serves
desirable
end
ensuring
issues
wishes
consider
fully
briefed
argued
suggestion
hear
reargument
case
serves
end
distinctions
might
support
claim
conventional
equal
protection
principles
defendant
also
establish
standing
raise
obtaining
relief
see
alexander
louisiana
also
silent
whether
state
may
demonstrate
use
peremptories
rests
merely
assumptions
ante
sociological
studies
similar
foundations
see
saltzburg
powers
peremptory
challenges
clash
impartiality
group
representation
md
rev
assessment
juror
prejudices
based
group
affiliation
accurate
counsel
exercised
challenge
intended
remove
partial
jurors
jurisdiction
spoken
matter
prohibited
prosecution
peremptory
challenges
basis
cognizable
group
affiliation
held
defense
must
likewise
prohibited
leslie
en
banc
one
warned
overturning
swain
potential
stretching
criminal
trials
already
long
making
voir
dire
title
vii
proceeding
miniature
clark
potential
clearly
realized
worth
observing
congress
unable
locate
constitutional
deficiencies
peremptory
challenge
system
discerns
today
solicitor
general
explains
urging
rejection
sixth
amendment
issue
presented
petition
affirmance
decision
reconciling
traditional
peremptory
challenge
system
requirements
sixth
amendment
instructive
consider
accommodation
made
congress
jury
selection
service
act
et
seq
house
report
makes
clear
bill
leaves
undisturbed
right
litigant
exercise
peremptory
challenges
eliminate
jurors
purely
subjective
reasons
brief
amicus
curiae
quoting
question
required
turner
certain
capital
cases
demonstrates
inapplicability
traditional
equal
protection
analysis
jury
voir
dire
seeking
impartial
jury
surely
question
rests
generalized
stereotypic
racial
notions
condemned
equal
protection
grounds
contexts
california
attempted
finesse
problem
asserting
discrimination
often
based
appearances
verified
racial
descent
showing
prosecution
systematically
excusing
persons
appear
black
establish
prima
facie
case
racial
discrimination
people
motton
cal
suggests
however
proper
inquiry
concerns
actual
race
jurors
excluded
rather
counsel
subjective
impressions
race
spring
unclear
record
impressions
made
similar
difficulties
may
lurk
case
remand
fact
jury
composed
white
persons
selected
ante
basis
finding
prosecutor
statement
response
question
defense
counsel
looking
yes
jury
app
also
underscored
today
hold
petitioner
established
prima
facie
case
entitling
form
relief
ante
petitioner
concedes
virtually
impossible
prosecutor
case
recall
used
peremptory
challenges
fashion
brief
petitioner
although
delaware
suggested
might
follow
rule
like
adopted
today
see
riley
state
issue
retroactive
application
rule
appear
litigated
published
decision
justice
rehnquist
chief
justice
joins
dissenting
opening
line
opinion
case
involves
reexamination
portion
swain
alabama
concerning
evidentiary
burden
placed
criminal
defendant
claims
denied
equal
protection
state
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
members
race
petit
jury
ante
omitted
reality
majority
opinion
deals
much
evidentiary
burden
little
discussion
less
analysis
also
overrules
one
fundamental
substantive
holdings
swain
namely
state
may
use
peremptory
challenges
remove
jury
basis
prospective
jurors
race
defendant
find
rejection
holding
ill
considered
unjustifiable
established
principles
equal
protection
dissent
swain
carefully
distinguished
two
possible
scenarios
involving
state
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
blacks
juries
criminal
cases
part
iii
majority
opinion
swain
concluded
first
scenarios
namely
exclusion
blacks
reasons
wholly
unrelated
outcome
particular
case
trial
deny
negro
right
opportunity
participate
administration
justice
enjoyed
white
population
might
violate
guarantees
equal
protection
see
felt
important
historic
purposes
peremptory
challenge
furthered
exclusion
blacks
case
case
whatever
circumstances
whatever
crime
whoever
defendant
victim
may
emphasis
added
nevertheless
ultimately
held
record
case
sufficient
demonstrate
th
rule
violated
petitioner
burden
proof
failed
carry
three
justices
dissented
arguing
petitioner
evidentiary
burden
satisfied
testimony
black
ever
served
petit
jury
relevant
county
see
goldberg
joined
warren
douglas
dissenting
significantly
swain
reached
different
conclusion
respect
second
kind
scenario
part
ii
opinion
held
state
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
blacks
particular
jury
based
assumption
belief
likely
favor
black
defendant
violate
equal
protection
justice
white
writing
explained
challenges
cause
permit
rejection
jurors
narrowly
specified
provable
legally
cognizable
basis
partiality
peremptory
permits
rejection
real
imagined
partiality
less
easily
designated
demonstrable
hayes
missouri
often
exercised
upon
sudden
impressions
unaccountable
prejudices
apt
conceive
upon
bare
looks
gestures
another
lewis
upon
juror
habits
associations
hayes
missouri
supra
upon
feeling
bare
questioning
juror
indifference
may
sometimes
provoke
resentment
lewis
supra
less
frequently
exercised
grounds
normally
thought
irrelevant
legal
proceedings
official
action
namely
race
religion
nationality
occupation
affiliations
people
summoned
jury
duty
question
prosecutor
defense
counsel
must
decide
whether
juror
particular
race
nationality
fact
partial
whether
one
different
group
less
likely
hence
veniremen
always
judged
solely
individuals
purpose
exercising
peremptory
challenges
rather
challenged
light
limited
knowledge
counsel
may
include
group
affiliations
context
case
tried
considerations
mind
hold
striking
negroes
particular
case
denial
equal
protection
laws
quest
impartial
qualified
jury
negro
white
protestant
catholic
alike
subject
challenged
without
cause
subject
prosecutor
challenge
particular
case
demands
traditional
standards
equal
protection
clause
entail
radical
change
nature
operation
challenge
challenge
pro
tanto
longer
peremptory
emphasis
added
footnotes
omitted
even
swain
dissenters
take
issue
majority
position
equal
protection
clause
prohibit
state
using
peremptory
challenges
exclude
blacks
based
assumption
belief
partial
black
defendant
dissenters
emphasized
view
concerning
evidentiary
burden
facing
defendant
alleges
equal
protection
claim
based
state
use
peremptory
challenges
mean
systematic
exclusion
negroes
jury
service
shown
prosecutor
motives
subject
question
judicial
inquiry
excludes
negroes
group
sitting
jury
particular
case
goldberg
dissenting
emphasis
added
today
asserts
however
equal
protection
clause
forbids
prosecutor
challenge
potential
jurors
solely
assumption
black
jurors
group
unable
impartially
consider
state
case
black
defendant
ante
later
discussing
state
need
establish
nondiscriminatory
basis
striking
blacks
jury
prosecutor
may
rebut
defendant
prima
facie
case
discrimination
stating
merely
challenged
jurors
defendant
race
assumption
intuitive
judgment
partial
defendant
shared
race
ante
neither
statements
anything
evidentiary
burden
necessary
establish
equal
protection
claim
context
statements
directly
contrary
view
equal
protection
clause
shared
majority
dissenters
swain
yet
instant
case
offers
absolutely
analysis
support
decision
overrule
swain
regard
fact
discuss
part
ii
swain
opinion
subscribe
unprecedented
use
equal
protection
clause
restrict
historic
scope
peremptory
challenge
described
necessary
part
trial
jury
swain
view
simply
nothing
unequal
state
using
peremptory
challenges
strike
blacks
jury
cases
involving
black
defendants
long
challenges
also
used
exclude
whites
cases
involving
white
defendants
hispanics
cases
involving
hispanic
defendants
asians
cases
involving
asian
defendants
use
peremptory
challenges
state
single
blacks
members
race
matter
discriminatory
treatment
use
peremptories
best
based
upon
instincts
undoubtedly
crudely
stereotypical
may
many
cases
hopelessly
mistaken
long
applied
jurors
races
nationalities
see
certainly
explained
use
violates
equal
protection
clause
use
peremptory
challenges
state
infringe
upon
constitutional
interests
suggest
exclusion
blacks
jury
state
use
peremptory
challenges
results
violation
either
impartiality
component
sixth
amendment
see
ante
use
peremptory
challenges
state
deny
blacks
right
serve
jurors
cases
involving
nonblack
defendants
harms
neither
excluded
jurors
remainder
community
see
ante
use
group
affiliations
age
race
occupation
proxy
potential
juror
partiality
based
assumption
belief
members
one
group
likely
favor
defendants
belong
group
long
accepted
legitimate
basis
state
exercise
peremptory
challenges
see
swain
supra
leslie
en
banc
carter
cert
denied
indeed
given
need
reasonable
limitations
time
devoted
voir
dire
use
proxies
state
defendant
may
extremely
useful
eliminating
jury
persons
might
biased
one
way
another
today
holds
state
may
use
peremptory
challenges
strike
black
prospective
jurors
basis
without
violating
constitution
believe
anything
equal
protection
clause
constitutional
provision
justifies
departure
substantive
holding
contained
part
ii
swain
petitioner
instant
case
failed
make
sufficient
showing
overcome
presumption
announced
swain
state
use
peremptory
challenges
related
context
case
therefore
affirm
judgment
note
rely
argument
fewer
minorities
given
population
majorities
equal
use
peremptory
challenges
members
majority
minority
racial
groups
unequal
impact
flaws
argument
demonstrated
judge
garwood
thoughtful
opinion
en
banc
fifth
circuit
leslie
see
commonwealth
dimatteo
mass
app
state
constitution
trial
judge
properly
rejected
white
defendant
attempted
peremptory
challenge
black
prospective
juror