The Judiciary Of A Country Essay

The social composition of the judiciary does matter, the importance played on ensuring a diverse judiciary. Ensuring that a judiciary is diverse by way of equality act 2010 – Protects people from discrimination in the workplace and wider society. And Human Rights Act

When looking at illegal actions and activities, also known as crimes, people of all color commit them. Whether people commit lesser or more excessive crimes, the action will be committed by a multitude of races. People of all colors are able to achieve the standards that have been set by society. When looking at the statistics, the evidence shows that people of color, especially African Americans tend to get harder and more solemn charges for the crimes that they have committed. What people might not notice is that there is a racial bias in the judicial system. That bias is changing the outcome of indictments. With all of the change going on in the United States of America, one untouched subject is the racial bias in the judicial system. If a change does not occur now, then when will there ever be a change? There is a racial bias in the judicial system, and a change needs to occur now.

Bringing in new judges will allow for different thought patterns and views on certain problems. In addition, “a different perspective can permit you to more fully understand the arguments that are before you and help you articulate your position in a way that everyone will understand” (Sotomayor, 2016). Furthermore, newer judges would relieve others of the concern that the judges are unfortunately unable to keep up with the current society and their needs. As a result, newer judges will be able to notice the issues that the current society may be needed to be

The criminal justice system of America is deeply scarred with racial bias. Crimes are being committed and, in turn, are resulting with innocent people doing hard-time. Thankfully, newfound methods of appealing court rulings are finding justice for these minorities; however, the results are as shocking as the crimes being committed. When it was found that the majority of successful appeals were of minorities, the true defects of the system was apparent. The minority community is being critically judged for things they’re not doing.

The intersection of racial dynamics with the criminal justice system is one of longstanding duration. In earlier times, courtrooms in many jurisdictions were comprised of all white decision-makers. Today, there is more diversity of leadership in the court system, but race still plays a critical role in many

Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then

Few in this country would argue with the fact that the United States criminal justice system possesses discrepancies which adversely affect Blacks in this country. Numerous studies and articles have been composed on the many facets in which discrimination, or at least disparity, is obvious. Even whites are forced to admit that statistics indicate that the Black community is disproportionately affected by the American legal system. Controversy arises when the issue of possible causes of, and also solutions to, these variations are discussed. It’s not just black versus white, it is white versus white, and white versus oriental, whatever the case may be, and it is not justice. If we see patterns then the judges should have the authority to say something. Jury nullifications cannot be overturned regardless of the cause. Exclusionary rule, according to CULS (2010) – Prevents the government from using most evidence gathered in violation of U.S. Constitution; like unreasonable search and seizure (Fourth Amendment).

Rosenburg, Friedman, Altman, Rossum and Tarr all illustrate societies past history and race within the court system. Race has always played a big factor in American history since the very beginning of the colonial time period. The United States has had a long history of oppressing minorities such as the enslavement of Africans, harassment of those who immigrated to the states, and

Since the founding of the American Democracy, partisanship has always been a major problem when it comes to political aspects of the law. The Constitution was designed to implement laws into our country that would make our governing body run smoother with fewer conflicts. However, when dealing with Democracy based on the “people’s word” it is hard to avoid such conflicts. Since each citizen in our country has the right to freedom of speech and thought, the interpretation of various parts of the Constitution have become heavily analyzed when dealing with cases of various crimes that happen in the United States. Each judge on the Supreme Court is entitled to his or her own political ideology so it is a constant debate as to whether a judge has biases on a particular issue based on political views. These biases weave through our justice system creating a disarray of views and arguments that always reflect back on the judges and their presentation, or lack their of, of American ways.

In consideration when making appointments would obviously be the candidates gender, race (to appease members of less represented minorities), religious affiliation (their stance on abortion et. al), possibility of judicial activism or restraint, and partisan affiliation (get the backing of your own interest groups or to gain support from the opposing).

Sommers, S. (2009, January 1). On the Obstacles to Jury Diversity. In www.thejuryepert.com. Retrieved November 29, 2014, from

What we have seen with how diversity can impact the Criminal Justice system is by, making sure that everyone is not excluded from the law. Within the Justice system there are laws and or regulations that the Criminal Justice system has to follow due to those person rights. Especially when it comes police officers, I say this because they are the first people to come into contact with the people and the ensuring the people uphold the law. There are many ways to where religion and personal believe have clashed with the law. For instance, when we look at those who marry a 12-year-old.

The aforementioned lack of legal expertise was felt and cased in ‘The Magistrates Tale’ where T, Grove recounts from personal experience that even after 80 sittings he still felt like a novice. T Grove is an ardent cheerleader for the use of magistrates and his passages reflect that as a magistrate is drawn from the local community there is a sense that people are being judged by their peers. John Humphreys shares this opinion and has been cited as stating that ‘if the people sitting up the on the bench are people like us…..then we may be more likely to feel that we have been fairly judged’. Not all aspects of society share this opinion; anecdotal evidence shows that defendants show mistrust in the magistracy as when faced with the option to be tried by the magistrate or a jury a favour is shown toward the jury. This mistrust can be based on the impression of the magistrate by the common man. Even though it is desired that the magistrate represent a cross section of society the majority of magistrates are middle aged, middle class, white men. The mistrust however could also be down to a misplaced view that magistrates begin to become sceptical of lines of defence, that they start to recognises defendants traits and in turn show bias to similar defendants, they become ‘case hardened’. However this can be counteracted with the fact that a magistrate is

Having a diverse bench is critical to having a successful criminal justice system. The United States court system follows a presumption of innocence, meaning those who enter a courtroom are presumed innocent until proven guilty. This presumption of innocence is not always found in the courtroom. Every courtroom actor, whether consciously or unconsciously, has a bias towards the defendant and may even presume guilt before the case begins. This is especially true when there is a white judge acting on cases involving a defendant who is a part of the minority. Judges who represent the minority are not only unbiased towards defendants of their own race, but they also bring new perspectives to the bench (Haire & Moyer, 2015). They present ideas, understandings, and

Gender is a critical dimension of judicial diversity illustrated by the proportions of positions awarded to the males and females on the judiciary. There are different ways of rationalising judicial diversity where judicial appointments follow policy and law that promotes equal opportunities. The judiciary needs to show sensitivity to the experiences and needs of the different elements of legal systems where the judiciary requires illustration of diversity for service as well as diverse judiciary with increased accountability of legal democracies. The current preclusion the gender incorporation dictates the alternative dimension regarding judicial diversity. Features of judicial initiatives towards achieving ethnic and gender diversity are assessed through qualitative and quantitative perceptions and experiences of judicial bias.