Why might an attorney utilize peremptory challenges?(1 point) Responses to remove a potential juror based on their residence in the community to remove a potential juror based on their residence in the community to remove a potential juror based on race to remove a potential juror based on race to remove a potential juror based on gender to remove a potential juror based on gender to remove a potential juror who exhibits prejudice or bias
The primary reason an attorney might utilize peremptory challenges is to remove potential jurors who exhibit prejudice or bias. This allows the attorney to create a fair and impartial jury for their client. However, it is important to note that peremptory challenges should not be used to discriminate based on factors such as race, gender, or residence in the community.
An attorney might utilize peremptory challenges to remove a potential juror based on their residence in the community, race, gender, or if they exhibit prejudice or bias. Peremptory challenges allow attorneys to remove prospective jurors without having to provide a specific reason or explanation for the removal. Attorneys often use these challenges to shape the composition of the jury in a way that they believe will be more favorable to their client's interests. It is important to note that peremptory challenges have limitations and cannot be used to discriminate against potential jurors based on protected characteristics such as race or gender, as established by the Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky.
An attorney might utilize peremptory challenges for various reasons, including:
1. Removing a potential juror based on their residence in the community: Attorneys may want to remove jurors who have close personal connections within the community, as they may have biases or preconceived notions that could affect their impartiality.
2. Removing a potential juror based on race: Unfortunately, attorneys have historically used peremptory challenges to remove jurors based on their race. However, it is important to note that this practice is now considered unconstitutional and is actively discouraged.
3. Removing a potential juror based on gender: Similar to race, attorneys have previously used peremptory challenges to remove jurors based on their gender. However, gender-based challenges are also now considered unconstitutional and discouraged.
4. Removing a potential juror who exhibits prejudice or bias: Peremptory challenges can be used to exclude jurors who have expressed clear prejudice or bias, whether related to the case or not. Attorneys want to ensure that jurors are impartial and capable of making an unbiased decision based solely on the presented evidence.
To utilize peremptory challenges, attorneys typically have a limited number of such challenges that they can use during jury selection. The exact number is determined by the jurisdiction's laws. Attorneys must provide a reason for each challenge, which can be scrutinized by the judge to ensure it does not violate constitutional rights (such as race or gender discrimination) or other legal principles.