ASTC Task Force on Peremptory Challenges
ASTC Task Force members have been actively engaged in on-going research and dialogue with courts across the country that are considering – or have already implemented – changes intended to cure the problem of discriminatory practices that decrease the representativeness and diversity of juries.
The ASTC and its members strongly support changes that effectively address discriminatory practices, but oppose the elimination of peremptory challenges as one such change.
In its paper, “Elimination of Peremptory Challenges…and Then There Were None,” the ASTC Task Force provides a brief history of peremptory challenges and the case law that has arisen to cure the discriminatory use of them, and proposes more effective jury selection practices that will improve the jury selection process, expand outreach to the venire, increase juror participation, improve juror experience, and ensure the appropriate use of challenges for cause and peremptory challenges.
This position paper continues ASTC’s commitment to enhance our clients’, the Courts’, and the public’s understanding of best jury selection practices and the empirical research which supports them. We support research-based efforts to improve voir dire conditions and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the jury selection process to the benefit of all stakeholders, in both criminal and civil trials nationwide.
ASTC members can click here to see additional information about the position paper and Task Force.
1) ASTC Position Paper on the Elimination of Peremptory Challenges
2) Lindsa Janda v. Michael A. Zulian, D.D.S. - Plaintiff's Motion No. 3 - Motion and Memorandum of Law Requesting Extended Time to Conduct Voir Dire and Request for Mini-Opening (Unopposed)
3) Lindsa Janda v. Michael A. Zulian, D.D.S. - Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion for Extended Time to Conduct Voir Dire and Request for Mini-Opening (Unopposed)
4) Salerno, et al. (2021). The impact of minimal versus extended voir dire and judicial rehabilitation on mock jurors' decisions in civil cases. Law and Human Behavior, 45(4), 336-355.