Attorneys for Payton Gendron, the white gunman who murdered 10 Black people at a Buffalo Tops supermarket in 2022, are now arguing that his federal charges should be dismissed because the grand jury that indicted him was not “diverse enough.”
According to ABC News, Gendron’s lawyers say in their motion that Black and Hispanic people, along with men, are “systemically and significantly underrepresented” on jury lists in the Buffalo area. They argue that this violates his constitutional right to a grand jury drawn from a fair cross-section of the community.
As previously reported, Gendron carried out a racist, targeted attack on a Tops supermarket located in a predominantly Black neighborhood. ABC News states that the victims ranged in age from 32 to 86 years old, and three others were wounded.
He has already been sentenced to life in prison without parole after pleading guilty in November 2022 to state charges, including murder. But the federal case is still on the horizon—and it carries the potential for a death penalty sentence if he’s convicted.
Defense Argues Jury Process Was Flawed
In their filing, Gendron’s attorneys claim that the grand jury pool had only about one-third of the expected number of Black and Hispanic/Latino jurors. They also noted that the data sources used to compile the jury list were not preserved by the vendor, making it impossible to verify the process.
They argue this is enough to prove that Gendron’s rights were violated and that the federal charges should be thrown out.
Prosecutors Fire Back
Prosecutors, however, aren’t buying it. The U.S. Attorney’s office wrote that the defense arguments “fail both as a matter of law and fact.” They said Gendron has not shown evidence of systemic underrepresentation caused by the jury selection plan.
According to their response, any disparities in racial makeup were still within accepted guidelines, and the process is neutral. Jurors are drawn from voter rolls, driver’s license and tax records, disability rolls, and unemployment rolls.
In ABC News, prosecutors point out the bigger picture:
“The defendant is charged with killing 10 Black people and injuring three other individuals as part of a racially motivated attack on a grocery store. He now demands that the court dismiss the indictment against him because… the jury plan led to the underrepresentation of certain minority groups.”
The Court’s Next Move
U.S. District Judge Lawrence Vilardo is scheduled to hear oral arguments on the motion. Meanwhile, Gendron’s attorneys are also fighting against the death penalty. ABC News states that they argue he should be spared because he was only 18 years old at the time of the massacre, an age they say is too young to justify capital punishment, given brain development research.
That separate motion is still pending.
The Bigger Picture
This case is not just about courtroom technicalities—it’s about accountability. Gendron deliberately chose a supermarket in a Black neighborhood, livestreamed his attack, and killed 10 innocent people because of their race.
Now, his legal team is trying to pivot the focus away from the violence and onto the racial composition of the jury that indicted him. You can’t make this up. The irony: a man who specifically targeted Black people is now claiming his own rights were violated because there weren’t enough Black people in the jury pool.
The Stakes Remain High
At the end of the day, the families of those killed and wounded are still living with unimaginable loss. The federal trial will determine whether Gendron faces the death penalty, and these motions show just how aggressively his lawyers are trying to keep that possibility off the table.
But let’s be real—arguing that the Buffalo shooter’s indictment isn’t valid because of diversity gaps on a jury list feels like a stretch, especially when the massacre itself was motivated by his obsession with race.
