Gender and the Peremptory Challenge: Separating the Effects of Race and Gender in Jury Selection

REFERENCES

• Alexander, M. (2010). The New Jim Crow: Mass incarceration in the age of colorblindness. New Press.
   Google Scholar
• Austin, P. C. (2011). An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 46(3), 399–424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2011.568786
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Austin, P. C., & Mamdani, M. M. (2006). A comparison of propensity score methods: A case-study estimating the effectiveness of post-AMI statin use. Statistics in Medicine, 25(12), 2084–2106. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.2328
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baldus, D. C., Woodworth, G., Zuckerman, D., Weiner, N. A., & Broffitt, B. (2001). The use of peremptory challenges in capital murder trials: A legal and empirical analysis. Journal of Constitutional Law, 3, 3–172.
   Google Scholar
• Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, M. W. (2010). Unraveling the Gordian knot of implicit bias in jury selection: The problems of judge-dominated voir dire, the failed promise of Batson, and proposed solutions. Harvard Law & Policy Review, 4, 149–171.
   Google Scholar
• Cavise, L. L. (1999). The Batson doctrine: The Supreme Court's utter failure to meet the challenge of discrimination in jury selection. Wisconsin Law Review, 1999, 501–552.
   Google Scholar
• Craft, W. (2018). Peremptory strikes in Mississippi’s Fifth Circuit Court District. APM Reports. https://www.apmreports.org/files/peremptory_strike_methodology.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Craft, W., Montgomery, D., Tungekar, R., Yesko, P., Caputo, A., Hing, G. (2018). The role of race in jury selection. https://github.com/APM-Reports/jury-data
   Google Scholar
• DeCamp, W., & DeCamp, E. (2020). It’s still about race: Peremptory challenge use on black prospective jurors. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 57(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022427819873943
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357 (1979).
   Google Scholar
• Eisenberg, A. M. (2017). Removal of women and African-Americans in jury selection in South Carolina capital cases, 1997-2012. Northeastern University Law Journal, 9, 299–346.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan, F. X. (2018). Race, gender, and juries: Evidence from North Carolina. The Journal of Law and Economics, 61(2), 189–214. https://doi.org/10.1086/698193
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flowers v. Mississippi, No. 17–9572, 588 U.S. ___ (2019).
   Google Scholar
• Grosso, C. M., & O’Brien, B. (2012). A stubborn legacy: The overwhelming importance of race in jury selection in 173 post-Batson North Carolina capital trials. Iowa Law Review, 97, 1531–1559.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hightower, S. (2000). Sex and the peremptory strike: An empirical analysis of JEB v. Alabama's First Five Years. Stanford Law Review, 52(4), 895–928. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229434
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994).
   Google Scholar
• McGonigle, S., Becka, H., Lafleur, J., & Wyatt, T. (2005, August 21). A process of juror elimination: Dallas prosecutors say they don’t discriminate, but analysis shows they are more likely to reject black jurors. Dallas Morning News, A1.
   Google Scholar
• Morehead, J. W. (1994). When a peremptory challenge is no longer peremptory: Batson's unfortunate failure to eradicate invidious discrimination from jury selection. DePaul Law Review, 43, 625–641.
   Google Scholar
• New York Times. (1968, June 15). Women on Mississippi Juries.
   Google Scholar
• Parsons, L. S. (2001). Reducing bias in a propensity score matched-pair sample using greedy matching techniques (paper 214-26) [Paper presentation]. SUGI 26 proceedings (proceedings of the 26th annual SAS users group international conference). SAS Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Paternoster, R., & Brame, R. (2008). Reassessing race disparities in Maryland capital cases. Criminology, 46(4), 971–1007. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2008.00132.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pearson, L. M., & Madsen, C. C. (2005). Innovation and Accommodation: The Legal Status of Women in Territorial Utah, 1850–1896. In P. L. Scott and L. Thatcher (Eds.), Women in Utah history: Paradigm or paradox? (pp. 36–81). Utah State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ramos v. Louisiana, 590 U.S. ___ (2020).
   Google Scholar
• Rocco, P. (2017, October 4). Justice Roberts said political science is 'sociological gobbledygook.' Here's why he said it, and why he's mistaken. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/10/04/justice-roberts-said-political-science-is-sociological-gobbledygook-heres-why-he-said-it-and-why-hes-mistaken/
   Google Scholar
• Rose, M. R. (1999). The peremptory challenge accused of race or gender discrimination? Some data from one county. Law and Human Behavior, 23(6), 695–702. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022393506784
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1985). Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. The American Statistician, 39(1), 33–38. https://doi.org/10.2307/2683903
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strauder v. West Virginia, 100 U.S. 303 (1880).
   Google Scholar
• Swain v. Alabama, 380 U.S. 202 (1965).
   Google Scholar
• Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975).
   Google Scholar
• United States Census Bureau. (n.d.). QuickFacts: Mississippi. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/MS/PST045219
   Google Scholar
• Van Dyke, J. M. (1977). Jury selection procedures: Our uncertain commitment to representative panels. Ballinger.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, R. F., Chavis, K., & Parks, G. S. (2018). The Jury Sunshine Project: Jury selection data as a political issue. University of Illinois Law Review, 4, 1–47.
   Google Scholar