In federal voir dire, which statement is accurate about peremptory challenges?

• A. They may be used to exclude jurors for any reason.
• B. They must be used on every potential juror to ensure panel balance.
• C. They may not be used to exclude jurors based on race or gender.
• D. They are unlimited in number.

Answer: (C)

Peremptory challenges let a party strike a juror without giving a reason, but in federal courts that power is limited by anti-discrimination rules. The fundamental rule is that jurors cannot be excluded solely because of race or gender. This prohibition comes from Batson v. Kentucky and was extended to gender in J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. If a party raises a Batson-type concern, the challenging party must show a prima facie case that the other side struck jurors for discriminatory reasons; then the other side must give neutral, non-discriminatory explanations, and the judge decides whether the reasons are pretextual. So the statement that peremptory challenges may not be used to exclude jurors based on race or gender is the accurate one. They can be used for other non-discriminatory reasons, and their number is not unlimited.