Megan B. McCormack

Associate attorney with nearly five years of litigation experience. Known for strategic thinking, effective communication, and rigorous case analysis. Consistently collaborates with teams to achieve favorable outcomes for clients and adapts to evolving case requirements. Proven skills in drafting legal documents, conducting depositions, and providing client counsel.

New Mexico Trial Lawyers Association
American Bar Association

Committee on Women and the Legal Profession

American Association for Justice

Would an all-white jury have ruled differently? We need to ensure that all voices are heard in our legal system

• Albuquerque Journal, April 2021

In the wake of the jury verdict in the Derek Chauvin trial for the murder of George Floyd, the importance of jury selection is once again on the minds of those who aspire towards a racially fair criminal justice system. In the United States, on average, thirty-two million people are called for jury duty per year, and of them around eight to ten million ultimately report for jury duty. What we do not often hear about is who are the people being selected for a jury, how many of those called for jury duty are people of color, and how one gets selected to be on a jury. The jury in Derek Chauvin’s trial was composed of six white people, four Black people, and two people of mixed race. The question now is, what if that jury had been fully composed of all white jurors?

Why is this important? Because the necessity of impaneling a jury that fairly represents the community of one’s peers in cases where the jury may consider the law as well as the facts cannot be overemphasized. The voices of all members of society should be heard in the jury box. From the era of Reconstruction through the Jim Crow era, African Americans have suffered the most from harsh jail sentences and biased juries. These issues are still relevant and constantly occurring to this day as we can see with the recent events in the George Zimmerman trial, the trial for those who attacked Rodney King, et cetera, et cetera. The story is as old as this country is.

The Court’s response to discrimination in jury selection was addressed first in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, (1986), where the United States Supreme Court created a burden shifting scheme intended to root out the insidious practice of discrimination in jury selection. This case would disallow the removal of a potential juror based on race. That case is 40 years old and the issue persists. Lawyers are still permitted to remove a potential juror for any reason as long as it is not race. This translates to potential jurors being removed for any number of inane reasons, but the outcome is consistent: Black jurors are systematically removed from jury pools. Studies conducted around the country point time after time to the pattern of prosecutors removing Black jurors from the jury pool, not for cause, which is a legitimate way to remove a juror with potential conflicts, but by using peremptory challenges. A peremptory challenge is a choice given to lawyers to remove someone from the jury without giving any reason. There are a limited number allowed but they are reserved and used to aggressively white-wash the jury.

As public servants, prosecutors should be willing to put their cases before anyone in the communities they serve, that means people from all backgrounds, races, and opinions. If Derek Chauvin were given an all-white jury, would justice have prevailed? We need the voices of all Americans on our juries to ensure that justice is served for all Americans.

Member in good standing of New Mexico State Bar (October 2022) and Federal Bar (June 2023)