Removing Race From the Jury Deliberation Room: The Shortcomings of Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado and How to Address Them

Authors

Lauren Crump, University of Richmond School of Law

Abstract

This comment explores ways in which racial bias undermines

the American jury system and argues that simply having a racial

bias exception to the no-impeachment rule does not go far enough

to guard against racially motivated jury verdicts. In order to

guarantee the Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury, defendants

must always be able to question potential jurors about

racial bias, and universal court policies need to be adopted across

the country that allow for a consistent approach for investigating

claims of racial bias in jury deliberations. Part I of this comment

examines the history of American juries and the inception of the

no-impeachment rule. Part II discusses the background that led

to the Peiia-Rodriguez decision, while Part III dissects the Court's

decision of the case. Part IV argues that the exception created by

the Court in Peha-Rodriguez does not go far enough to guard

against racial biases in jury deliberations and proposes policy

changes that would allow for incidents of racial bias to be addressed

prior to the issuing of a verdict. Finally, Part V concludes

this comment by reiterating the importance of having an impartial

jury that is free from racial bias.

Recommended Citation

Lauren Crump, Removing Race From the Jury Deliberation Room: The Shortcomings of Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado and How to Address Them, 52 U. Rich. L. Rev. 475 (2018).
Available at: https://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview/vol52/iss2/7