Source: Arizona Business Gazette

On February 1, 2001, the Arizona Business Gazette reported that, "in a precedent-setting move, the Arizona Court of Appeals has expanded the list of prohibited reasons for striking jurors to include their religion. The judges concluded that allowing attorneys to use their peremptory strikes to get rid of Roman Catholics because church leaders oppose the death penalty 'would condition the right to free exercise of religion upon a relinquishment of the right to jury service.'" The judges said, however, that it is still okay to eliminate prospective jurors for a separate reason, "even if the other reason is 'intertwined' with the juror's religion. The case surrounds the trial of Bobby C. Purcell...As the trial was beginning, prosecutors used a peremptory strike to remove a potential juror who was a secretary with the Catholic Diocese of Phoenix." Appellate Judge Susan Ehrlich, writing for the unanimous court, wrote that "'a peremptory strike based on religious affiliation is not narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest.'...Here, the judge said, the prosecutor had shown that his reason for eliminating the woman from the jury panel was her opposition to the death penalty and related concerns about the pressure from her employer...'Her religious membership was not the basis for striking her from the jury panel, and her opposition to capital punishment was a legitimate basis for exercising a peremptory strike,' Ehrlich said." She pointed out that the Arizona Constitution "does not prevent a strike based on a prospective juror's relevant specific opinion, even if religion-based, which prevents the juror from fairly and impartially applying the law in a given case."