About: Batson v. Kentucky     Goto   Sponge   NotDistinct   Permalink

An Entity of Type : umbel-rc:Event, within Data Space : dbpedia.org associated with source document(s)
QRcode icon
http://dbpedia.org/describe/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdbpedia.org%2Fresource%2FBatson_v._Kentucky

Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race. The Court ruled that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case gave rise to the term Batson challenge, an objection to a peremptory challenge based on the standard established by the Supreme Court's decision in this case. Subsequent jurisprudence has resulted in the extension of Batson to civil cases (Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company) and cases where jurors are excluded on the basis of sex (J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.).

AttributesValues
rdf:type
rdfs:label
  • Batson v. Kentucky (en)
  • Caso Batson contra Kentucky (es)
rdfs:comment
  • Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court ruling that a prosecutor's use of a peremptory challenge in a criminal case—the dismissal of jurors without stating a valid cause for doing so—may not be used to exclude jurors based solely on their race. The Court ruled that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The case gave rise to the term Batson challenge, an objection to a peremptory challenge based on the standard established by the Supreme Court's decision in this case. Subsequent jurisprudence has resulted in the extension of Batson to civil cases (Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company) and cases where jurors are excluded on the basis of sex (J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.). (en)
  • Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), fue un caso en el que la Corte Suprema de Estados Unidos dictaminó que las recusaciones sin causa (peremptory challenges) por parte de un fiscal en la selección del jurado para un caso criminal no pueden ser utilizadas para excluir jurados basándose únicamente en su raza. El Tribunal dictaminó que esta práctica viola la cláusula de igual protección de la Decimocuarta Enmienda. El caso dio lugar al término "impugnación Batson" (Batson challenge), una objeción a una recusación sin causa sobre la base de la regla establecida por la decisión del Tribunal Supremo en este caso. La jurisprudencia posterior ha dado lugar a la extensión de Batson para casos civiles (Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company) y los casos en que los miembros del jurado son excluid (es)
foaf:name
  • (en)
  • Batson v. Kentucky (en)
dcterms:subject
Wikipage page ID
Wikipage revision ID
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
sameAs
Subsequent
  • Remanded (en)
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
Faceted Search & Find service v1.17_git139 as of Feb 29 2024


Alternative Linked Data Documents: ODE     Content Formats:   [cxml] [csv]     RDF   [text] [turtle] [ld+json] [rdf+json] [rdf+xml]     ODATA   [atom+xml] [odata+json]     Microdata   [microdata+json] [html]    About   
This material is Open Knowledge   W3C Semantic Web Technology [RDF Data] Valid XHTML + RDFa
OpenLink Virtuoso version 08.03.3330 as of Mar 19 2024, on Linux (x86_64-generic-linux-glibc212), Single-Server Edition (378 GB total memory, 53 GB memory in use)
Data on this page belongs to its respective rights holders.
Virtuoso Faceted Browser Copyright © 2009-2024 OpenLink Software