Prosecutors strike Black jurors at 75% rate vs 0.4% for white jurors

In California, prosecutors used peremptory challenges to remove Black jurors in nearly 75% of cases studied and Latino jurors in 28% of cases, while striking white jurors in only 0.4% of cases. In North Carolina, prosecutors used 60% of their peremptory strikes against Black jurors who constituted only 32% of the jury pool. Despite the Supreme Court's 1986 Batson v. Kentucky ruling prohibiting race-based strikes, the decision is functionally unenforceable. Prosecutors need only provide a 'race-neutral' explanation for each strike — such as the juror's demeanor, neighborhood, or employment — and judges accept these explanations at face value. North Carolina's Supreme Court has never found a single Batson violation in three decades. The consequence is that defendants of color routinely face juries that do not reflect their community, undermining the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial by an impartial jury of one's peers. This persists because the Batson framework places the burden on the defense to prove discriminatory intent (which is nearly impossible when any facially neutral reason suffices), and because trial court judges are reluctant to accuse fellow officers of the court of racism.