Мы используем файлы cookie.
Продолжая использовать сайт, вы даете свое согласие на работу с этими файлами.
J.E.B. v. Alabama ex rel. T.B.
Другие языки:

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

    Подписчиков: 0, рейтинг: 0
    J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B.
    Argued November 2, 1993
    Decided April 19, 1994
    Full case name J. E. B., Petitioner v. Alabama ex rel. T. B.
    Citations 511 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
    Prior Certiorari 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
    Majority Blackmun, joined by Stevens, O'Connor, Souter, Ginsburg
    Concurrence O'Connor
    Concurrence Kennedy
    Dissent Rehnquist
    Dissent Scalia, 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 Supreme Court of the United States holding that peremptory challenges based solely on a prospective juror's sex are unconstitutional.J.E.B. extended the court's existing precedent in Batson v. Kentucky (1986), which found race-based peremptory challenges in criminal trials unconstitutional, and Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company (1991), which extended that principle to civil trials. 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

    Further reading

    External links



    Новое сообщение