Batson on both counts. This case went through the courts and finalized in the U.S. Supreme Court. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Batson. The Court held that the Fourteenth Amendment forbids the prosecutor from challenging potential jurors solely on account of their race or on the assumption that black jurors as a group will be unable to consider the states case against a black defendant impartially (74 A.B.A.J. 54, April, 1988). Quoting an 1880 ruling that barred the exclusion of blacks from the jury venire itself; Justice Powells opinion for the Court stressed the importance of excluding racial prejudice from the jury process.The harm from discriminatory jury selection extends beyond that inflicted on the defendant and the excluded juror to touch the entire community. Selection procedures that purposefully exclude black persons from juries undermine public confidence in the fairness of our system of justice. Discrimination within the judicial system is most pernicious because it is a stimulant to the race prejudice which is an impediment to securing to [black citizens] that equal justice, which the law aims to secure to all others. (72 A.B.A.J. 68, July, 1986)With the Courts ruling new standards were set that required the defendant to show:--That they are members of a cognizable racial group and that the prosecutor has exercised peremptory challenges to remove from the venire members of the defendants race--The defendants may rely on the fact that peremptory challenges are a jury selection practice which allow those who are minded to discriminate to do so--That these facts and any other relevant circumstances raise an inference that the prosecutor used that practice to exclude the veniremen from the petit jury on account of their race. (Batson v. Kentucky 476 U.S. 79 [1986])The Batson case had been given retroactive effect, under the new standards, to all cases that were pending on direct review or not ye...
