Integrated juries deliberate more thoroughly

When the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a black death-row inmate in Texas last year due to strong evidence of racial bias during jury selection, Justice Stephen G. Breyer added his own denunciation of an exclusionary practice that he suggested had grown all too pervasive.

The use of race- and gender-based stereotypes in the jury- selection process seems better organized and more systematized than ever before, Breyer wrote in a separate, concurring opinion in which he focused his criticism on lawyers' widespread use of race-based peremptory challenges. (Miller-El v. Dretke, No. 125 S.Ct. 2317 (2005).)

Many observers praised Breyer for taking a moral position about racial inclusion. But in April of this year, new research by a Tufts University psychology professor took the argument against race- based jury exclusion one step further: A study involving 29 mock juries populated by blacks and whites from one community showed that racially diverse juries simply perform better than all-white ones. The findings appeared in the April issue of the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.