Final answer:
The Supreme Court decision that requires a district attorney to justify the use of peremptory challenges to strike Blacks from the jury is Batson v. Kentucky. This decision established a three-step process for evaluating the constitutionality of peremptory challenges based on racial discrimination.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Supreme Court decision that requires a district attorney to justify the use of peremptory challenges to strike Blacks from the jury is Batson v. Kentucky. In this case, the Court held that the use of peremptory challenges based solely on race violates a defendant's right to an impartial jury under the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. The decision established a three-step process for evaluating the constitutionality of peremptory challenges based on racial discrimination.
In the first step, the defendant must make a prima facie showing that the prosecutor used peremptory challenges to exclude jurors based on race. If the defendant meets this burden, the burden then shifts to the prosecutor to provide race-neutral reasons for each strike in the second step. Finally, in the third step, the court must determine whether the defendant has shown purposeful discrimination in the prosecutor's use of peremptory challenges.
For example, if a district attorney uses all peremptory challenges to strike Blacks from the jury, the defense can argue that this raises an inference of racial discrimination. The prosecutor would then need to articulate race-neutral explanations for each strike, such as the potential juror's demeanor, attitude, or prior experiences that may contribute to bias.