Stacy Hawkins
{"title":"Batson for Judges, Police Officers & Teachers: Lessons in Democracy From the Jury Box","authors":"Stacy Hawkins","doi":"10.36643/mjrl.23.1.batson","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In our representative democracy we guarantee equal participation for all, but we fall short of this promise in so many domains of our civic life. From the schoolhouse, to the jailhouse, to the courthouse, racial minorities are underrepresented among key public decision-makers, such as judges, police officers, and teachers. This gap between our aspirations for representative democracy and the reality that our judges, police officers, and teachers are often woefully under-representative of the racially diverse communities they serve leaves many citizens of color wanting for the democratic guarantee of equal participation. This critical failure of our democracy threatens to undermine the legitimacy of these important civic institutions. It deepens mistrust between minority communities and the justice system and exacerbates the failures of a public education system already lacking accountability to minority students.\n\nBut there is hope for rebuilding the trust, accountability and legitimacy of these civic institutions on behalf of minority citizens. There is one place where we have demonstrated a deeper commitment to our guarantee of democratic equality on behalf of minority citizens and exerted greater effort to that end than perhaps in any other domain of our civic life—the jury box. This paper recounts this important history and explores the political theory underlying the equal protection jurisprudence of jury selection. It then applies these lessons gleaned from the jury context to the constitutional defense of efforts to achieve greater racial diversity within the judiciary, law enforcement, and public education, all of which are as important to the legitimacy of our democracy today as the jury has been throughout American history.","PeriodicalId":373432,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Race & Law","volume":"178 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Race & Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36643/mjrl.23.1.batson","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在我们的代议制民主中,我们保证所有人平等参与,但我们在公民生活的许多领域都没有实现这一承诺。从学校到监狱,再到法院,少数族裔在法官、警察和教师等关键公共决策者中的代表性不足。我们对代议制民主的渴望与我们的法官、警察和教师在他们所服务的不同种族群体中往往代表性不足的现实之间存在着差距,这使得许多有色人种的公民渴望平等参与的民主保障。我们民主的这一重大失败可能会破坏这些重要公民机构的合法性。它加深了少数族裔社区与司法系统之间的不信任,并加剧了本已缺乏对少数族裔学生负责的公共教育系统的失败。但是,代表少数民族公民重建这些公民机构的信任、问责和合法性是有希望的。在一个地方,我们代表少数民族公民对保障民主平等作出了更深刻的承诺,并为此作出了比我们公民生活的任何其他领域都更大的努力——陪审席。本文叙述了这一重要历史,并探讨了陪审团选择平等保护法理学的政治理论基础。然后,它将这些从陪审团背景中收集到的经验教训应用到宪法中,以捍卫在司法、执法和公共教育中实现更大的种族多样性的努力,所有这些对我们今天民主的合法性都与陪审团在美国历史上的重要性一样重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Batson for Judges, Police Officers & Teachers: Lessons in Democracy From the Jury Box
In our representative democracy we guarantee equal participation for all, but we fall short of this promise in so many domains of our civic life. From the schoolhouse, to the jailhouse, to the courthouse, racial minorities are underrepresented among key public decision-makers, such as judges, police officers, and teachers. This gap between our aspirations for representative democracy and the reality that our judges, police officers, and teachers are often woefully under-representative of the racially diverse communities they serve leaves many citizens of color wanting for the democratic guarantee of equal participation. This critical failure of our democracy threatens to undermine the legitimacy of these important civic institutions. It deepens mistrust between minority communities and the justice system and exacerbates the failures of a public education system already lacking accountability to minority students. But there is hope for rebuilding the trust, accountability and legitimacy of these civic institutions on behalf of minority citizens. There is one place where we have demonstrated a deeper commitment to our guarantee of democratic equality on behalf of minority citizens and exerted greater effort to that end than perhaps in any other domain of our civic life—the jury box. This paper recounts this important history and explores the political theory underlying the equal protection jurisprudence of jury selection. It then applies these lessons gleaned from the jury context to the constitutional defense of efforts to achieve greater racial diversity within the judiciary, law enforcement, and public education, all of which are as important to the legitimacy of our democracy today as the jury has been throughout American history.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信