Legal Definitions - absolute disparity

Absolute disparity is a constitutional law calculation used to assess if a jury pool fairly represents the community. It measures the difference between a specific group's percentage in the general population and its percentage in the pool of prospective jurors.

Absolute disparity is a legal calculation used to measure the difference between a specific demographic group's representation in the general population and its representation within a pool of prospective jurors. This calculation is crucial in constitutional law for evaluating claims that a jury selection process has failed to draw from a fair cross-section of the community, potentially violating a defendant's rights. It is determined by subtracting the percentage of a group in the jury pool from the percentage of that group in the eligible general population.

Here are some examples illustrating how absolute disparity is applied:

• Example 1: Racial/Ethnic Representation

  Consider a county where the adult population eligible for jury service is 25% of Hispanic descent. However, an analysis of the jury pool (the list of individuals summoned for jury duty) over a specific period reveals that only 10% of those called are of Hispanic descent. To calculate the absolute disparity for this group, we subtract the percentage in the jury pool from the percentage in the general population: 25% (general population) - 10% (jury pool) = 15%. This 15% absolute disparity indicates a significant underrepresentation of Hispanic individuals in the jury pool compared to their presence in the community, which could form the basis of a legal challenge claiming an unfair jury selection process.

• Example 2: Age Group Representation

  Imagine a city where individuals aged 18-30 constitute 20% of the population eligible for jury service. A study of the actual jury panels selected for trials, however, shows that only 8% of the jurors are within this 18-30 age bracket. The absolute disparity for this younger age group would be 20% (eligible population) - 8% (jury panels) = 12%. This 12% disparity suggests that younger adults are substantially underrepresented in the final jury selections, potentially raising concerns about whether the juries truly reflect the community's diverse age demographics.

• Example 3: Socioeconomic Status

  In a particular judicial district, 40% of the eligible population lives in households with an annual income below the median for that area. If a review of the master jury list (the initial list from which potential jurors are drawn) shows that only 25% of the individuals on that list come from households below the median income, the absolute disparity for this socioeconomic group would be 40% (eligible population) - 25% (master jury list) = 15%. This 15% disparity highlights a potential imbalance where individuals from lower-income households are less likely to be included in the initial pool of prospective jurors, which could lead to questions about the fairness and impartiality of the jury selection system.