-
Abstract
We compare two jury selection procedures meant to safeguard against the inclusion of biased jurors that are perceived as causing minorities to be under-represented.
The Strike and Replace procedure presents potential jurors one-by-one to the parties, while the Struck procedure presents all potential jurors before the parties exercise vetoes.
Struck more effectively excludes extreme jurors but leads to a worse representation of minorities.
The advantage of Struck in terms of excluding extremes is sizable in a wide range of cases.
In contrast, Strike and Replace better represents minorities only if the minority and majority are heavily polarized.
-
External appendix
-
CitationBibTeX
Moro, Andrea, and Martin Van der Linden. "Exclusion of Extreme Jurors and Minority Representation: The Effect of Jury Selection Procedures,"
arXiv/econ.GN working paper 2102.07222,
June
2022
@article{moro-vanderlinden-juryselection-2022,
title = "Exclusion of Extreme Jurors and Minority Representation: The Effect of Jury Selection Procedures",
author = "Moro, Andrea and Martin {Van der Linden}",
year = "2022",
month = " June ",
journal = "arXiv/econ.GN working paper",
volume = "2102.07222",
url = "http://andreamoro.net/assets/papers/juryselection.pdf"
}