Discuss both sides of the following questions: Does a nonminority defendant in a criminal case have the standing to challenge the exclusion of minority defendants from juries? List arguments on both sides of the issue. Compare your arguments with those in Powers v. Ohio, 499 U.S. 400 (1991) and Campbell v. Louisiana, 523 U.S. 392 (1998).
For all written assignments, present reasoning and evidence for your position in a clear, well structured, manner that illustrates a high level of critical thinking. In doing so, you will investigate, research, and consider alternative arguments and explanations before reaching your conclusion. Your response should be about 500 words. Upload your response as a Word document using the link above no later
Proponents of nonminority standing argue that nonminority defendants have a direct personal interest in challenging the exclusion of minority defendants from juries. They maintain that such exclusion undermines the fundamental principle of fair and impartial justice, which is a cornerstone of the American legal system.
Arguments Against Nonminority Standing to Challenge Minority Exclusion from Juries
Opponents of nonminority standing argue that nonminority defendants lack the necessary personal stake or injury to challenge the exclusion of minority jurors. They contend that only minority defendants have a direct interest in ensuring that their jury pool includes members of their own race or ethnicity.
Comparison with Powers v. Ohio and Campbell v. Louisiana
The Supreme Court has addressed the issue of nonminority standing in two landmark cases: Powers v. Ohio (1991) and Campbell v. Louisiana (1998). In both cases, the Court recognized the right of nonminority defendants to challenge the exclusion of minority jurors.
In Powers v. Ohio, the Court held that a nonminority defendant had standing to challenge the exclusion of black jurors because the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a fair and impartial jury was implicated by the discriminatory exclusion of black jurors.
In Campbell v. Louisiana, the Court reaffirmed its holding in Powers and extended it to allow nonminority defendants to challenge the exclusion of African American and Hispanic jurors. The Court reasoned that the exclusion of these minority groups violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
Both Powers and Campbell recognized the importance of ensuring fair and impartial juries for all defendants, regardless of their race or ethnicity. The Court’s decisions in these cases reflect the growing recognition that nonminority defendants have a legitimate interest in challenging the exclusion of minority jurors, as it undermines the fundamental principles of fairness and justice in the American legal system.