Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Newly Compelling: Reexamining Judicial Construction of Juries in the Aftermath of Grutter v. Bollinger

Joshua Wilkenfeld
Columbia Law Review
Vol. 104, No. 8 (Dec., 2004), pp. 2291-2327
DOI: 10.2307/4099360
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4099360
Page Count: 37
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Newly Compelling: Reexamining Judicial Construction of Juries in the Aftermath of Grutter v. Bollinger
Preview not available

Abstract

For years, constitutional doctrine had invalidated judicial attempts to construct community-reflective juries. In the recently decided case of Grutter v. Bollinger, however, the Supreme Court held that where a diversity-enhancing system promotes the performance of internal processes of and enhances the legitimacy of a core governmental function, that classification system (if narrowly tailored) fulfills a compelling governmental interest and survives strict scrutiny. This Note applies Grutter to the jury context by examining the possibility that diverse juries function better than their homogenous counterparts. Thereafter, this Note argues that, much like in the educational affirmative action context, judicial construction of community-reflective juries enhances the perceived legitimacy of the justice system. All these gains can be achieved while tailoring the government classification system as narrowly as the system upheld in Grutter. As a result of these benefits, jury construction efforts should be allowable under Grutter and the Fourteenth Amendment.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
2291
    2291
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2292
    2292
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2293
    2293
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2294
    2294
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2295
    2295
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2296
    2296
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2297
    2297
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2298
    2298
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2299
    2299
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2300
    2300
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2301
    2301
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2302
    2302
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2303
    2303
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2304
    2304
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2305
    2305
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2306
    2306
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2307
    2307
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2308
    2308
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2309
    2309
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2310
    2310
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2311
    2311
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2312
    2312
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2313
    2313
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2314
    2314
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2315
    2315
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2316
    2316
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2317
    2317
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2318
    2318
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2319
    2319
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2320
    2320
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2321
    2321
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2322
    2322
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2323
    2323
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2324
    2324
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2325
    2325
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2326
    2326
  • Thumbnail: Page 
2327
    2327