Also known as: peremptory strikes · peremptory challenge · peremptory challenges
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A procedural device permitting a party in a jury trial to remove a prospective juror without stating a reason or showing cause. The device operates within numeric limits fixed by statute or rule and remains subject to constitutional prohibitions on discriminatory use.
In a federal district court prosecution for wire fraud punishable by more than one year in prison, the government exercised six peremptory strikes against the venire while the defendant exercised ten. The court seated the jury after confirming that each side had used only its allotted strikes.
During voir dire in a state robbery trial, the prosecutor struck all three Black venire members. Defense counsel made a prima facie showing of racial motivation. The prosecutor offered a race-neutral explanation, and the trial court determined that purposeful discrimination had not been proven.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
In a federal product-liability suit, the district judge attempted to limit each side to two peremptory strikes for scheduling reasons. Plaintiff objected, and the court restored the full statutory number required by federal law before proceeding with jury selection.
In a state negligence action, defense counsel struck every female venire member who had young children, citing a belief that mothers would favor the plaintiff. The opposing party objected on equal-protection grounds, and the trial court sustained the objection after finding the explanation rested on gender alone.
In a federal civil rights suit, a corporate defendant used peremptory strikes to remove all Black venire members. The plaintiff moved to disallow the strikes on equal-protection grounds. The court held that the private party's use of strikes constituted state action and prohibited the racially discriminatory exercise.
A litigant facing a judge who had received campaign contributions from the opposing side sought the judge's recusal. Counsel likened the request to a peremptory strike against the judge. The court rejected the analogy, noting that peremptory challenges apply to jurors, not judges, and denied the motion.
Under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 24(b)(2), the government receives six peremptory challenges and the defendant receives ten when the offense is punishable by more than one year of imprisonment.
The objecting party must first make a prima facie showing of discrimination. The striking party then must offer a race-neutral explanation. The trial court finally determines whether purposeful discrimination has been proven.
No. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 47(b) requires the court to allow the number of peremptory challenges provided by 28 U.S.C. § 1870, and judges may not cut that number for case-management reasons.
Yes. The Supreme Court has held that strikes exercised solely because of a juror's sex are unconstitutional, and the prohibition applies to both prosecutors and private litigants in state-run jury selection.
Yes. Because jury selection is a traditional public function conducted with significant court participation, a private party's racially discriminatory use of peremptory challenges constitutes state action prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause.
…During jury selection at his trial, the judge conducted voir dire and excused certain jurors for cause. The prosecutor then used peremptory challenges to strike all four black persons on the venire, and a jury composed only of white persons was selected. Defense counsel moved to discharge the jury before it was sworn on the ground that…