| Hernandez v. New York | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States |
||||||
| Argued February 25, 1991 Decided May 28, 1991 |
||||||
| Full case name | Hernandez v. New York | |||||
| Holding | ||||||
| A prosecutor's peremptory challenges of Spanish-speaking Latino jurors based on his doubts about the ability of such jurors to defer to the official translation of Spanish-language testimony did not violate the Equal Protection Clause. | ||||||
| Court membership | ||||||
|
||||||
| Case opinions | ||||||
| Plurality | Kennedy, joined by Rehnquist, White, Souter | |||||
| Concurrence | O'Connor, joined by Scalia | |||||
| Dissent | Blackmun | |||||
| Dissent | Stevens, joined by Marshall | |||||
Hernandez v. New York, 500 U.S. 352 (1991), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that a prosecutor may dismiss jurors who are bilingual in Spanish and English from juries that will consider Spanish-language testimony.
Peremptory challenges are used to remove jurors thought to be undesirable for virtually any reason by either side in a court case. However, in Batson v. Kentucky (1986), the Supreme Court ruled that peremptory challenges may not be used to remove jurors because of their race. In Hernandez, the Supreme Court had to decide whether the peremptory exclusion of two Hispanic jurors was tantamount to exclusion because of race—and therefore violated the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution.