Jump to content

J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alcaios (talk | contribs) at 15:17, 15 June 2020. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B.
Supreme Court of the United States
Argued November 2, 1993
Decided April 19, 1994
Full case nameJ. E. B., Petitioner v. Alabama ex rel. T. B.
Citations511 U.S. 127 (more)
114 S.Ct. 1419; 128 L. Ed. 2d 89; 1994 U.S. LEXIS 3121; 62 USLW 4219; 64 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) ¶ 42,967
Case history
PriorCertiorari to the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals 606 So.2d 156
Holding
Intentional discrimination on the basis of gender by state actors in the use of peremptory strikes in jury selection violates the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment.
Court membership
Chief Justice
William Rehnquist
Associate Justices
Harry Blackmun · John P. Stevens
Sandra Day O'Connor · Antonin Scalia
Anthony Kennedy · David Souter
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Case opinions
MajorityBlackmun, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Ginsburg
ConcurrenceO'Connor
ConcurrenceKennedy
DissentRehnquist
DissentScalia, joined by Rehnquist, Thomas
Laws applied
U.S. Const. amend. XIV

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court ruling that peremptory challenges based solely on a prospective juror's sex is unconstitutional.[1] J.E.B. extended the court's existing precedent in Batson v. Kentucky (1986), which found race-based peremptory challenges in criminal trials unconstitutional,[2] and Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company (1991), which extended that principle to civil trials.[3] As in Batson, the court found that sex-based challenges violate the Equal Protection Clause.

Background

On behalf of T.B., the mother of a minor child, the state sued J.E.B. for child support in Jackson County, Alabama. During jury selection, challenges intentionally targeted male potential jurors resulting in an all-female jury.

Decision

The Majority opinion was written by Justice Blackmun. Justice O'Connor wrote a concurring opinion, and Justice Kennedy separately concurred in the judgment. Chief Justice Rehnquist filed a separate dissenting opinion. Justice Scalia also filed a dissenting opinion, which was joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist and Justice Thomas.

See also

References

  1. ^ J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994).
  2. ^ Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
  3. ^ Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Co., 500 U.S. 614 (1991).

Further reading

  • Currie, C. M.; Pillick, A. M. (1996). "Sex Discrimination in the Selection and Participation of Female Jurors: A Post-J.E.B. Analysis". Judges' Journal. 35 (1): 2–6, 38–41. ISSN 0047-2972.
  • Harden, L. L. M. (1995). "The End of the Peremptory Challenge? The Implications of J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel T.B. for Jury Selection in Alabama". Alabama Law Review. 47: 243. ISSN 0002-4279.
  • Wichterman, S. L. (1995). "JEB v. Alabama ex rel. TB: Gender-Based Peremptory Challenges on Trial". Northern Illinois University Law Review. 16: 209. ISSN 0734-1490. Archived from the original on 2009-04-17.


Stub icon

This article related to the Supreme Court of the United States is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J.E.B._v._Alabama_ex_rel._T.B.&oldid=962702445"