J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel T. B.

During the final phase of jury selection, attorneys on both sides question prospective jurors to determine their suitability to sit on the jury. Their goal is to dismiss jurors who might be biased against the interests of their clients. This process is called voir dire. During voir dire attorneys use two means to eliminate potential jurors: challenge for cause and peremptory challenge. When an attorney has reason to believe a juror will show partiality or be unfit to perform the duties of a juror, she may explain to the judge her reasoning and have the juror dismissed for cause. The number of challenges for cause dismissals is not unlimited, however. Attorneys may also reject potential jurors by peremptory challenge, excusing a juror without stating specific reason or cause. Peremptory challenge allows an attorney to exclude persons who cannot be successfully challenged for cause. The number of these challenges is also limited and set by law or court rules. The objective of peremptory challenge is to further ensure a fair, impartial jury.

Race or gender may not be the basis of a peremptory challenge. However, in the 1990s controversy raged over whether true elimination of race and gender bias had been achieved.