The US Supreme Court [official website] on Monday granted certiorari [order list, PDF] in a case regarding racial bias expressed in jury deliberation and whether the no-impeachment rules applied in this scenario violate an individual’s Sixth Amendment [text] right to an impartial jury. Pena-Rodriguez v. Colorado [docket] has come before the Supreme Court because after the initial verdict against Miguel Angel Pena-Rodriguez, two jurors came forward and alleged that another juror had made racially-charged comments [AP report] during deliberation that suggested the verdict could have been based on racial bias. Pena-Rodriguez sought a new trial, but the Colorado court determined that the state’s “no impeachment” rule required jurors to be ineligible to testify about statements made during deliberation, so the petition for a writ of certiorari was filed [text, PDF].

State and federal courts alike have no-impeachment rules to “promote the finality of verdicts and to shield jurors from outside influences.” However, court decisions have been split as far as the application of the rule to situations such as this, where the statements in question could have infringed upon an individual’s constitutional rights. Colorado argues that the no-impeachment rule should prevent the statements from being used as evidence, and they argue that even if considered, there is evidence suggesting the statements did not influence the decision. Racial bias is not only present on the decision-making side, however. On the other end of the jury process, the Supreme Court in November heard arguments [JURIST report] in a case dealing with racial discrimination in the jury selection process.