Composed of many racial minorities and lower class citizens, the jury from the 2000 court case against Adnan Syed showed considerable bias against him. The 14th Amendment of the Constitution guarantees "equal protection of the laws." In the case of United States v. Doe in 1990, the "Constitution prohibits racially-biased arguments." A defendant in any case that is accused of a crime must be judged on the evidence presented in the trial, not on stereotypes about his background or race. Adnan Syed was born in the United States to immigrant parents from Pakistan, but no matter where his parents came from, he is American citizen. During the trial, Adnan's race was brought up several times as an argument against him. The prosecutor introduced him at the start of the trial by saying, "The defendant is of Pakistani background, he's a Muslim." He encouraged the jury to look at the defendant's ethnicity and religion as a cause for the events that had transpired. If I were in the jury I would have looked past race and analyzed the facts; The original jurors did the opposite. They saw that Adnan was Muslim and immediately believed he was capable of murder because of his nationality. It was even brought up during the trial that if Adnan were to be freed, he would attempt to escape to Pakistan, similarly to a case before this involving someone of Pakistani origin (Brown). Even if the jurors didn't believe this to be true, it made an impact on the rest of the trial.