Also known as: race neutral reason · race-neutral reasons · race-neutral explanation · Batson reason · neutral justification
Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
A justification offered by a party exercising a peremptory challenge after a prima facie showing of racial discrimination in jury selection. The explanation must be facially neutral as to race. A court then determines whether the reason is pretextual and whether purposeful discrimination has been proven.
Raphael Rivera, on trial for robbery, notes that the prosecutor uses peremptory strikes to remove every Black venire member. Rivera makes a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. The prosecutor responds that each struck juror had prior contact with law enforcement through family members. The trial court accepts the explanation and seats the jury without further inquiry into pretext.
Rowan Russell sues Redwood Bank for wrongful foreclosure in federal court. During voir dire the bank strikes two Black prospective jurors. Russell objects and establishes a prima facie case. The bank states that the jurors appeared inattentive during the judge's preliminary instructions. The court must decide whether this explanation masks purposeful discrimination.
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Renee Rogers faces criminal charges and objects when the defense uses peremptory strikes to remove all remaining jurors of one race. She shows a statistical pattern of exclusion. The defense offers that each struck juror had expressed hesitation about imposing severe penalties. The trial court evaluates whether the stated concerns are genuine or pretextual.
A defendant or objecting party must first establish a prima facie case by showing that peremptory challenges were exercised against members of a cognizable racial group in a manner that raises an inference of purposeful discrimination. Once that showing is made, the striking party must articulate a race-neutral reason.
No. At the second step the reason need only be facially race-neutral. The persuasiveness of the explanation becomes relevant only at the third step when the court decides whether the reason is pretextual and whether purposeful discrimination has occurred.
Yes. Private litigants in civil cases exercise peremptory challenges that constitute state action because jury selection is a traditional governmental function performed with substantial court participation. Equal protection therefore forbids race-based peremptory strikes in civil litigation as well.
If the striking party fails to offer any race-neutral explanation after a prima facie showing, the court must sustain the objection and disallow the strikes or provide an appropriate remedy such as reseating the jurors.
…challenges to remove black persons from the prospective jury. Edmonson’s motion that Leesville be required to articulate a race-neutral explanation for those challenges was denied, and the resulting jury, which included no black members, returned a verdict unfavorable to Edmonson. The Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that a private…