Ace the ETS Criminal Justice Exam 2025 – Unleash Your Inner Crime Fighter!

A defendant has the right to challenge a juror without specifying a reason, which is known as a peremptory challenge. This allows the defense (and prosecution) to remove jurors from the pool without having to provide a justification or explain their reasoning. The ability to do so is rooted in the principle that both sides should have the opportunity to shape a jury that they believe is fair or impartial, particularly given the high stakes involved in a trial.

This right is distinct from other types of challenges, such as "for cause" challenges, where a specific reason must be articulated, such as bias or a conflict of interest. The use of peremptory challenges can vary by jurisdiction, but they generally offer a strategic way for attorneys to influence the composition of the jury.

Having unlimited challenges is not typically the case in court settings; jurisdictions usually impose a limit on the number of peremptory challenges each side can exercise. Similarly, while questioning jurors before selection is an important part of the voir dire process, it does not constitute the right to challenge them directly as peremptory challenges do. Additionally, challenges based on race are prohibited by the Equal Protection Clause, as established in cases like Batson v. Kentucky, meaning that jurors cannot be