Chasing green ambulances

Submitted by Richard (United States), Mar 13, 2013 at 14:13

The attorney's statement to the judge, "I think it would be hard for Jews to cast aside any innate antipathy," should have been responded to by the judge by flipping the claim: "If that's true, Mr. Cohn, then I'll have to assume you will excuse yourself from defending the accused for the same reason." On the other hand, Cohn's attempt to set this new precedent, and put the constitution aside to help his client, would have been helped if he found some other similar situations:

Are there cases where attorneys for blacks accused of crimes against whites can keep whites off juries? Are attorneys for child molesters allowed to keep parents off juries? Can attorneys for rapists exclude women off juries? Can attorneys for gays keep religious people off juries?

Beyond that, how was Cohn planning to determine a potential juror's religion? By asking them, or assuming from their name, or maybe requesting Jewish jurors save time by wearing a yellow arm-band when they step up to the jury box?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".