 (Not) Canceling out the cross-section: Mitigating the effect of peremptory challenges on jury selectionFrancis X. Flanagan International Review of Law and Economics, 2025, vol. 82, issue C Abstract: The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees a criminal defendant the right to an impartial jury. According to current precedent, this requires individual jurors to be unbiased and the jury to have a fair possibility of being a representative cross-section of the community. I show that current selection procedures systematically exclude certain types of jurors, making it impossible to achieve a representative cross-section. I argue that this violates the requirements for an impartial jury, and I propose an alternative jury selection procedure that is incentive compatible and eliminates the distortion created by the current system. The new procedure also reduces the variance of the seated jury relative to a random selection, when measuring variance by distance to the median jury, which makes the application of justice less arbitrary. Data from Mississippi and Louisiana are analyzed to illustrate the results. Keywords: Jury selection; Peremptory challenge; Impartial jury; Sixth Amendment (search for similar items in EconPapers) Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:82:y:2025:i:c:s0144818825000158 DOI: 10.1016/j.irle.2025.106259 Access Statistics for this article International Review of Law and Economics is currently edited by C. Ott, A. W. Katz and H-B. Schäfer More articles in International Review of Law and Economics from Elsevier |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.