5 percent of jury members have been African American, and fewer than 2 percent have been Hispanic even though the 1990 census showed a combined nonwhite population of more than 8 percent in the 10 counties from which the court draws jurors (The Seattle Times, May 1992). Washington State chooses their jurors by voter registration, which limits the selection to only those citizens who vote. One may say that if someone is not registered to vote then they should not be on the jury to make legal decisions. That is not the idea behind a trial by jury. Not voting does not shelter you from what is going on in your community or neighborhood. A jury of peers is what our legal system states, not dedicated voters only. An alternative to selecting jurors would be drivers licenses. There are more people who drive than vote.Many attorneys and legal scholars claim that an impartial jury is unattainable. The first step taken was to define peremptory challenges with more alertness to possible bias. The next step up for debate is whether the 200 year old tradition should be eliminated altogether. No decision has been made yet, but opinions have been widely spread on the matter. Peremptory challenges have become a cloak for discrimination and should be abolished, former Philadelphia Bar Association Chancellor Andre L Dennis told the city Human Relations Commission at a hearing on racial bias in the court system on October 13, 1998. And Wanda E. Flowers, co-chair of the bar association task force, called for greater awareness of subtle racism which leads to unconscious discriminatory conduct (The Legal Intelligencer, Oct., 1998). Many lawyers conclude that the peremptory challenges are long, drawn out, and arbitrary. An impartial jury is not the goal during voir dire. Attorneys are looking for people who are most likely to convict or not to convict. Peremptory challenges take away from the jury of ones peers. Sifting through people to find ...
