Newly compelling: Reexamining judicial construction of juries in the aftermath of Grutter v Bollinger

For years, constitutional doctrine had invalidated. judicial, attempts 1,0 construct community-reflective juires. In the recently decided case of Grutter v. Bollinger, however, the Supreme Court held that where a diversity-enhancing system promotes the performance of internal processes of and, enhances the legitimacy of a core governmental function, that classification system (if narrowly tailored,) fulfills a compelling governmental interest and survives strict scrutiny. This Note applies Grutter to the jury context by examining the possibility that diverse juries function, better than their homogenous counterparts. Thereafter, this Note argues that, much like in the educational affirmative action context, judicial construction of community-reflective juries enhances the perceived legitimacy of the justice system. All. these gains can. be achieved while tailoring the government classification system as narrowly as the system upheld. in Grutter. As a result of these benefits jury construction efforts should be allowable under Grutter and the Fourteenth Amendment.