The Supreme Court has repeatedly asserted that a defendant isnot entitled to aju

The Supreme Court has repeatedly asserted that a defendant isnot entitled to ajury composed in whole or in part of persons of his own race.Although theserulings establish that states are not obligated to use raciallymixed juriesthey do not prohibit states from doing so. In fact a number ofpolicymakers andlegal scholars have proposed reforms that use racial criteria topromote racialdiversity on American juries. Some have suggested that the names ofmajorityrace jurors be removed from the jury list (thus ensuring a largerproportion ofracial minorities); others have suggested that a certain number ofseats on eachjury be set aside for racial minorities. 3-4 pages withreferencesHow would you justify these reforms to a state legislature?How would an opponent of these reforms respond?Overall are these good ideas or bad ideas?