alabama
ex
rel
argued
november
decided
april
petitioner
paternity
child
support
trial
respondent
state
used
peremptory
challenges
remove
male
jurors
empaneled
jury
rejecting
petitioner
claim
logic
reasoning
batson
kentucky
held
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
prohibits
peremptory
strikes
based
solely
race
extend
forbid
peremptory
challenges
jury
found
petitioner
father
child
question
trial
ordered
pay
child
support
alabama
civil
appeals
affirmed
held
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
discrimination
jury
selection
basis
gender
assumption
individual
biased
particular
case
solely
person
happens
woman
man
respondent
peremptory
challenges
survive
heightened
equal
protection
scrutiny
affords
distinctions
based
gender
respondent
rationale
decision
strike
virtually
males
case
may
reasonably
based
perception
supported
history
men
otherwise
totally
qualified
serve
jurors
might
sympathetic
receptive
arguments
man
charged
paternity
action
women
equally
qualified
might
sympathetic
receptive
arguments
child
mother
virtually
unsupported
based
stereotypes
law
condemns
conclusion
litigants
may
strike
potential
jurors
solely
basis
gender
imply
elimination
peremptory
challenges
long
gender
serve
proxy
bias
unacceptable
jurors
may
still
removed
including
members
group
class
normally
subject
page
ii
rational
basis
review
exhibit
characteristics
disproportionately
associated
one
gender
pp
reversed
remanded
blackmun
delivered
opinion
stevens
souter
ginsburg
joined
filed
concurring
opinion
kennedy
filed
opinion
concurring
judgment
rehnquist
filed
dissenting
opinion
scalia
filed
dissenting
opinion
rehnquist
thomas
joined
alabama
ex
rel
justice
blackmun
delivered
opinion
batson
kentucky
held
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
governs
exercise
peremptory
challenges
prosecutor
criminal
trial
explained
although
defendant
right
petit
jury
composed
whole
part
persons
race
quoting
strauder
west
virginia
defendant
right
tried
jury
whose
members
selected
pursuant
nondiscriminatory
criteria
since
batson
reaffirmed
repeatedly
commitment
jury
selection
procedures
fair
nondiscriminatory
recognized
whether
trial
criminal
civil
potential
jurors
well
litigants
equal
protection
right
jury
selection
procedures
free
group
stereotypes
rooted
reflective
historical
prejudice
see
powers
ohio
edmonson
leesville
concrete
georgia
mccollum
although
premised
equal
protection
principles
apply
equally
gender
discrimination
recent
cases
defining
scope
batson
involved
alleged
racial
discrimination
exercise
peremptory
challenges
today
faced
question
whether
equal
alabama
ex
rel
protection
clause
forbids
intentional
discrimination
basis
gender
prohibits
discrimination
basis
race
hold
gender
like
race
unconstitutional
proxy
juror
competence
impartiality
behalf
relator
mother
minor
child
respondent
state
alabama
filed
complaint
paternity
child
support
petitioner
district
jackson
county
alabama
october
matter
called
trial
jury
selection
began
trial
assembled
panel
potential
jurors
males
females
excused
three
jurors
cause
remaining
jurors
male
state
used
peremptory
strikes
remove
male
jurors
petitioner
used
one
strikes
remove
female
jurors
result
selected
jurors
female
jury
empaneled
petitioner
objected
state
peremptory
challenges
ground
exercised
male
jurors
solely
basis
gender
violation
equal
protection
clause
fourteenth
amendment
app
petitioner
argued
logic
reasoning
batson
kentucky
prohibits
peremptory
strikes
solely
basis
race
similarly
forbids
intentional
discrimination
basis
gender
rejected
petitioner
claim
empaneled
jury
app
jury
found
petitioner
father
child
entered
order
directing
pay
child
support
motion
reaffirmed
ruling
batson
extend
peremptory
challenges
app
alabama
civil
appeals
affirmed
relying
alabama
precedent
see
murphy
state
cert
alabama
ex
rel
denied
ex
parte
murphy
alabama
denied
certiorari
granted
certiorari
resolve
question
created
conflict
authority
whether
equal
protection
clause
forbids
peremptory
challenges
basis
gender
well
basis
race
today
reaffirm
axiomatic
intentional
discrimination
alabama
ex
rel
basis
gender
state
actors
violates
equal
protection
clause
particularly
discrimination
serves
ratify
perpetuate
invidious
archaic
overbroad
stereotypes
relative
abilities
men
women
ii
discrimination
basis
gender
exercise
peremptory
challenges
relatively
recent
phenomenon
peremptory
strikes
hardly
practicable
country
existence
since
century
women
completely
excluded
jury
service
exclusion
women
finding
exclusion
men
juries
violated
fourteenth
amendment
expressed
doubt
state
may
confine
selection
jurors
males
strauder
west
virginia
see
also
fay
new
york
many
continued
exclude
women
jury
service
well
present
century
despite
fact
women
attained
suffrage
upon
ratification
nineteenth
amendment
alabama
ex
rel
permit
women
serve
juries
often
erected
barriers
registration
requirements
automatic
exemptions
designed
deter
women
exercising
right
jury
service
see
fay
new
york
permitted
women
serve
juries
might
claim
exemption
sex
hoyt
florida
upholding
affirmative
registration
statute
exempted
women
mandatory
jury
service
prohibition
women
juries
derived
english
common
law
according
blackstone
rightfully
excluded
women
juries
doctrine
propter
defectum
sexus
literally
defect
sex
degross
en
banc
quoting
blackstone
commentaries
country
supporters
exclusion
women
juries
tended
couch
objections
terms
ostensible
need
protect
women
ugliness
depravity
trials
women
thought
fragile
virginal
withstand
polluted
courtroom
atmosphere
see
bailey
state
ark
criminal
trials
often
involve
testimony
alabama
ex
rel
foulest
kind
sometimes
require
consideration
indecent
conduct
use
filthy
loathsome
words
references
intimate
sex
relationships
elements
prove
humiliating
embarrassing
degrading
lady
goodell
endorsing
statutory
ineligibility
women
admission
bar
everence
womanhood
suffer
public
spectacle
women
engaged
bradwell
state
wall
concurring
opinion
civil
law
well
nature
always
recognized
wide
difference
respective
spheres
destinies
man
woman
man
woman
protector
defender
natural
proper
timidity
delicacy
belongs
female
sex
evidently
unfits
many
occupations
civil
life
paramount
destiny
mission
woman
fulfil
noble
benign
offices
wife
mother
law
creator
cf
frontiero
richardson
plurality
opinion
attitude
romantic
paternalism
put
women
pedestal
cage
ballard
first
questioned
fundamental
fairness
denying
women
right
serve
juries
relying
supervisory
powers
federal
courts
held
women
may
excluded
venire
federal
trials
women
eligible
jury
service
local
law
response
argument
women
superior
unique
perspective
defendants
denied
fair
trial
virtue
exclusion
jury
panels
explained
said
panel
drawn
various
groups
within
community
truly
representative
women
included
thought
factors
tend
influence
action
women
influence
alabama
ex
rel
action
men
personality
background
economic
status
sex
yet
enough
say
women
sitting
jurors
neither
act
tend
act
class
men
likewise
act
like
class
truth
two
sexes
fungible
community
made
exclusively
one
different
community
composed
subtle
interplay
influence
one
among
imponderables
insulate
courtroom
either
may
given
case
make
iota
difference
yet
flavor
distinct
quality
lost
either
sex
excluded
footnotes
omitted
finally
repudiated
reasoning
hoyt
struck
sixth
amendment
affirmative
registration
statute
nearly
identical
one
issue
hoyt
see
taylor
louisiana
explained
restricting
jury
service
alabama
ex
rel
special
groups
excluding
identifiable
segments
playing
major
roles
community
squared
constitutional
concept
jury
trial
diverse
representative
character
jury
must
maintained
partly
assurance
diffused
impartiality
partly
sharing
administration
justice
phase
civic
responsibility
quoting
thiel
southern
pacific
frankfurter
dissenting
see
also
duren
missouri
iii
taylor
relied
sixth
amendment
principles
opinion
approach
consistent
heightened
equal
protection
scrutiny
afforded
classifications
since
reed
reed
consistently
subjected
classifications
heightened
scrutiny
recognition
real
danger
government
policies
professedly
based
reasonable
considerations
fact
may
reflective
archaic
overbroad
generalizations
gender
see
schlesinger
ballard
based
outdated
misconceptions
concerning
role
females
home
rather
marketplace
world
ideas
craig
boren
see
also
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
differential
treatment
sexes
likely
reflect
outmoded
notions
relative
capabilities
men
women
despite
heightened
scrutiny
afforded
distinctions
based
gender
respondent
argues
gender
discrimination
selection
petit
jury
permitted
though
discrimination
basis
race
alabama
ex
rel
respondent
suggests
gender
discrimination
country
never
reached
level
discrimination
therefore
gender
discrimination
unlike
racial
discrimination
tolerable
courtroom
brief
respondent
prejudicial
attitudes
toward
women
country
identical
held
toward
racial
minorities
similarities
experiences
racial
minorities
women
contexts
overpower
differences
note
beyond
batson
eliminating
peremptory
challenges
plurality
observed
frontiero
richardson
hroughout
much
century
position
women
society
many
respects
comparable
blacks
war
slave
codes
neither
slaves
women
hold
office
serve
juries
bring
suit
names
married
women
traditionally
denied
legal
capacity
hold
convey
property
serve
legal
guardians
children
although
blacks
guaranteed
right
vote
women
denied
even
right
preservative
basic
civil
political
rights
adoption
nineteenth
amendment
half
century
later
footnotes
omitted
need
determine
however
whether
women
racial
minorities
suffered
hands
discriminatory
state
actors
decades
alabama
ex
rel
nation
history
necessary
acknowledge
nation
long
unfortunate
history
sex
discrimination
history
warrants
heightened
scrutiny
afford
classifications
today
equal
protection
jurisprudence
classifications
require
exceedingly
persuasive
justification
order
survive
constitutional
scrutiny
see
personnel
administrator
mass
feeney
see
also
mississippi
university
women
hogan
kirchberg
feenstra
thus
question
whether
discrimination
basis
gender
jury
selection
substantially
furthers
state
legitimate
interest
achieving
fair
impartial
trial
making
assessment
weigh
value
peremptory
challenges
institution
asserted
commitment
eradicate
invidious
discrimination
courtroom
instead
consider
whether
peremptory
challenges
based
gender
stereotypes
provide
substantial
aid
litigant
effort
secure
fair
impartial
jury
alabama
ex
rel
far
proffering
exceptionally
persuasive
justification
peremptory
challenges
respondent
maintains
decision
strike
virtually
males
jury
case
may
reasonably
based
upon
perception
supported
history
men
otherwise
totally
qualified
serve
upon
jury
might
sympathetic
receptive
arguments
man
alleged
paternity
action
father
child
women
equally
qualified
serve
upon
jury
might
ore
sympathetic
receptive
arguments
complaining
witness
bore
child
brief
respondent
alabama
ex
rel
shall
accept
defense
peremptory
challenges
stereotype
law
condemns
powers
ohio
respondent
rationale
unlike
regularly
expressed
strikes
reminiscent
arguments
advanced
justify
total
exclusion
women
juries
respondent
offers
virtually
support
conclusion
gender
alone
accurate
predictor
juror
attitudes
yet
urges
condone
stereotypes
justified
wholesale
exclusion
women
juries
ballot
alabama
ex
rel
box
respondent
seems
assume
gross
generalizations
deemed
impermissible
made
basis
race
somehow
permissible
made
basis
gender
discrimination
jury
selection
whether
based
race
gender
causes
harm
litigants
community
individual
jurors
wrongfully
excluded
participation
judicial
process
litigants
harmed
risk
prejudice
motivated
discriminatory
selection
jury
infect
entire
proceedings
see
edmonson
slip
op
discrimination
courtroom
raises
serious
questions
fairness
alabama
ex
rel
proceedings
conducted
community
harmed
state
participation
perpetuation
invidious
group
stereotypes
inevitable
loss
confidence
judicial
system
discrimination
courtroom
engenders
state
actors
exercise
peremptory
challenges
reliance
gender
stereotypes
ratify
reinforce
prejudicial
views
relative
abilities
men
women
stereotypes
wreaked
injustice
many
spheres
country
public
life
active
discrimination
litigants
basis
gender
jury
selection
invites
cynicism
respecting
jury
neutrality
obligation
adhere
law
powers
ohio
potential
cynicism
particularly
acute
cases
issues
prominent
cases
involving
rape
sexual
harassment
paternity
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
may
create
impression
judicial
system
acquiesced
suppressing
full
participation
one
gender
deck
stacked
favor
one
side
see
verdict
accepted
understood
fair
jury
chosen
unlawful
means
outset
recent
cases
emphasized
individual
jurors
right
nondiscriminatory
jury
selection
procedures
see
powers
edmonson
alabama
ex
rel
mccollum
supra
contrary
respondent
suggestion
right
extends
men
women
see
mississippi
university
women
hogan
state
practice
discriminates
males
rather
females
exempt
scrutiny
reduce
standard
review
cf
brief
respondent
arguing
men
deserve
protection
gender
discrimination
jury
selection
victims
historical
discrimination
persons
granted
opportunity
serve
jury
right
excluded
summarily
discriminatory
stereotypical
presumptions
reflect
reinforce
patterns
historical
discrimination
striking
individual
jurors
assumption
alabama
ex
rel
hold
particular
views
simply
gender
practically
brand
upon
affixed
law
assertion
inferiority
strauder
west
virginia
denigrates
dignity
excluded
juror
woman
reinvokes
history
exclusion
political
participation
message
sends
courtroom
may
later
learn
discriminatory
act
certain
individuals
reason
gender
presumed
unqualified
state
actors
decide
important
questions
upon
reasonable
persons
disagree
alabama
ex
rel
iv
conclusion
litigants
may
strike
potential
jurors
solely
basis
gender
imply
elimination
peremptory
challenges
neither
conflict
state
legitimate
interest
using
challenges
effort
secure
fair
impartial
jury
parties
still
may
remove
jurors
feel
might
less
acceptable
others
panel
gender
simply
may
serve
proxy
bias
parties
may
also
exercise
peremptory
challenges
remove
venire
group
class
individuals
normally
subject
rational
basis
review
see
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
clark
jeter
even
strikes
based
characteristics
disproportionately
associated
one
gender
appropriate
absent
showing
pretext
conducted
properly
voir
dire
inform
litigants
potential
jurors
making
reliance
upon
stereotypical
pejorative
notions
particular
gender
race
unnecessary
unwise
voir
dire
provides
means
discovering
actual
implied
bias
firmer
basis
upon
parties
may
exercise
peremptory
challenges
intelligently
see
nebraska
alabama
ex
rel
press
assn
stuart
brennan
concurring
judgment
voir
dire
facilitate
intelligent
exercise
peremptory
challenges
helps
uncover
factors
dictate
disqualification
cause
witt
without
adequate
foundation
laid
voir
dire
counsel
exercise
sensitive
intelligent
peremptory
challenges
experience
many
jurisdictions
barred
challenges
belies
claim
litigants
trial
courts
incapable
complying
rule
barring
strikes
based
gender
see
supra
citing
state
federal
jurisdictions
extended
batson
gender
batson
claims
party
alleging
gender
discrimination
must
make
prima
facie
showing
intentional
discrimination
alabama
ex
rel
party
exercising
challenge
required
explain
basis
strike
batson
explanation
required
need
rise
level
cause
challenge
rather
merely
must
based
juror
characteristic
gender
proffered
explanation
may
pretextual
see
hernandez
new
york
failing
provide
jurors
protection
gender
discrimination
race
discrimination
frustrate
purpose
batson
gender
race
overlapping
categories
gender
used
pretext
racial
discrimination
allowing
parties
remove
racial
minorities
jury
race
gender
contravenes
equal
protection
principles
insulate
effectively
racial
discrimination
judicial
scrutiny
equal
opportunity
participate
fair
administration
justice
fundamental
democratic
system
furthers
goals
jury
alabama
ex
rel
system
reaffirms
promise
equality
law
citizens
regardless
race
ethnicity
gender
chance
take
part
directly
democracy
powers
ohio
indeed
exception
voting
citizens
honor
privilege
jury
duty
significant
opportunity
participate
democratic
process
persons
excluded
participation
democratic
processes
solely
race
gender
promise
equality
dims
integrity
judicial
system
jeopardized
view
concerns
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
discrimination
jury
selection
basis
gender
assumption
individual
biased
particular
case
reason
fact
person
happens
woman
happens
man
race
core
guarantee
equal
protection
ensuring
citizens
state
discriminate
meaningless
approve
exclusion
jurors
basis
assumptions
arise
solely
jurors
gender
batson
judgment
civil
appeals
alabama
reversed
case
remanded
proceedings
inconsistent
opinion
ordered
footnotes
state
courts
also
considered
constitutionality
peremptory
challenges
see
laidler
state
app
extending
batson
gender
state
burch
relying
state
federal
constitutions
di
donato
santini
review
denied
cal
tyler
state
md
relying
state
constitution
people
mitchell
app
aff
part
vacated
relevant
part
may
state
gonzales
app
cert
denied
state
levinson
haw
people
irizarry
app
commonwealth
hutchinson
mass
cf
state
culver
neb
refusing
extend
batson
gender
state
clay
mo
app
state
adams
la
app
cert
denied
la
state
oliviera
murphy
state
writ
denied
cert
denied
one
brief
exception
women
permitted
serve
juries
wyoming
territory
longer
allowed
juries
new
chief
justice
disfavored
practice
appointed
see
abrahamson
justice
juror
women
still
granted
right
serve
juries
see
rudolph
women
compulsory
late
three
alabama
mississippi
south
carolina
continued
exclude
women
jury
service
see
hoyt
florida
indeed
alabama
recognize
women
cognizable
group
jury
service
purposes
decision
white
crook
md
alabama
ex
rel
england
least
one
deviation
general
rule
males
serve
jurors
woman
subject
capital
punishment
widow
sought
postponement
disposition
husband
estate
birth
child
writ
de
ventre
inspiciendo
permitted
use
jury
matrons
examine
woman
determine
whether
pregnant
even
jury
matrons
used
examination
took
place
presence
men
also
composed
part
jury
cases
jury
matrons
used
colonial
period
apparently
fell
disuse
medical
profession
began
perform
function
see
note
jury
service
women
taylor
distinguished
hoyt
explaining
case
involve
defendant
sixth
amendment
right
jury
drawn
fair
cross
section
community
however
stated
taylor
effect
overruled
hoyt
see
alabama
ex
rel
payne
tennessee
conclude
peremptory
challenges
substantially
related
important
government
objective
need
decide
whether
classifications
based
gender
inherently
suspect
see
mississippi
university
women
stanton
stanton
harris
forklift
systems
ginsburg
concurring
remains
open
question
whether
classifications
based
gender
inherently
suspect
citations
omitted
although
peremptory
challenges
valuable
tools
jury
trials
constitutionally
protected
fundamental
rights
rather
one
means
constitutional
end
impartial
jury
fair
trial
georgia
mccollum
slip
op
respondent
argues
recognize
special
state
interest
case
state
interest
establishing
paternity
child
born
wedlock
respondent
contends
interest
justifies
use
peremptory
challenges
alabama
ex
rel
since
illegitimate
children
victims
historical
discrimination
entitled
heightened
scrutiny
equal
protection
clause
respondent
fails
recognize
legitimate
interest
possibly
exercise
peremptory
challenges
securing
fair
impartial
jury
see
edmonson
leesville
concrete
slip
op
sole
purpose
peremptory
challenge
permit
litigants
assist
government
selection
impartial
trier
fact
interest
change
parties
causes
state
interest
every
trial
see
proceedings
carried
fair
impartial
nondiscriminatory
manner
respondent
cites
one
study
support
claim
women
men
may
different
attitudes
certain
issues
justifying
use
gender
proxy
bias
see
hastie
penrod
pennington
inside
jury
authors
conclude
neither
student
citizen
judgments
typical
criminal
case
material
revealed
differences
male
female
verdict
preferences
picture
differs
rape
cases
female
jurors
appear
somewhat
male
jurors
majority
studies
suggest
gender
plays
identifiable
role
jurors
attitudes
see
hans
vidmar
judging
jury
majority
studies
significant
differences
way
men
women
perceive
react
trials
yet
studies
find
women
still
others
show
women
favorable
alabama
ex
rel
prosecutor
even
women
constitutional
right
serve
juries
commentators
warned
using
gender
proxy
bias
see
busch
law
tactics
jury
trials
age
general
specialized
education
availed
generally
men
women
appear
unsound
base
peremptory
challenge
case
upon
sole
ground
sex
manual
formerly
used
instruct
prosecutors
dallas
texas
provided
following
advice
like
women
jurors
ca
trust
however
make
best
jurors
cases
involving
crimes
children
possible
women
intuition
help
ca
win
case
facts
alschuler
jury
voir
dire
peremptory
challenges
review
jury
verdicts
another
widely
circulated
trial
manual
speculated
counsel
depending
upon
clearly
applicable
rule
law
wants
avoid
verdict
intuition
sympathy
verdict
amount
proved
clearly
demonstrated
blackboard
figures
example
generally
want
male
juror
women
desired
jurors
plaintiff
man
woman
juror
may
see
man
impeached
beginning
case
end
least
chance
woman
juror
particularly
man
happens
handsome
appealing
plaintiff
derelictions
overlooked
woman
inclined
forgive
sin
opposite
sex
definitely
belli
modern
trials
pp
ed
even
measure
truth
found
gender
stereotypes
used
justify
peremptory
challenges
fact
alone
support
discrimination
basis
gender
jury
selection
made
abundantly
clear
past
cases
gender
classifications
rest
impermissible
stereotypes
violate
equal
protection
clause
even
statistical
support
conjured
generalization
see
weinberger
wiesenfeld
holding
unconstitutional
social
security
act
classification
authorizing
benefits
widows
widowers
despite
fact
justification
differential
treatment
entirely
without
empirical
support
craig
boren
invalidating
oklahoma
law
established
different
drinking
ages
men
women
although
evidence
supporting
age
differential
trivial
statistical
sense
generalization
advanced
alabama
support
asserted
right
discriminate
basis
gender
least
overbroad
serves
perpetuate
outmoded
notions
relative
capabilities
men
women
cleburne
cleburne
living
center
invalidated
contexts
see
frontiero
richardson
stanton
stanton
craig
boren
mississippi
university
women
hogan
equal
protection
clause
interpreted
decisions
acknowledges
shred
truth
may
contained
stereotypes
requires
state
actors
look
beyond
surface
making
judgments
people
likely
stigmatize
well
perpetuate
historical
patterns
discrimination
given
recent
precedent
doctrinal
basis
justice
scalia
dissenting
opinion
mystery
justice
scalia
points
discrimination
issue
case
directed
men
rather
women
acknowledges
equal
protection
clause
protects
men
women
intentional
discrimination
basis
gender
see
post
citing
mississippi
university
women
hogan
also
appears
cognizant
fact
classifications
based
gender
must
merely
rational
see
post
must
supported
exceedingly
persuasive
justification
hogan
alabama
ex
rel
justice
scalia
admits
equal
protection
clause
interpreted
decisions
governs
exercise
peremptory
challenges
every
trial
potential
jurors
well
litigants
equal
protection
right
nondiscriminatory
jury
selection
procedures
see
post
citing
batson
powers
edmonson
mccollum
justice
scalia
suggest
overrule
cases
attempt
distinguish
intimates
discrimination
basis
gender
jury
selection
may
rational
see
post
offers
exceedingly
persuasive
justification
indeed
justice
scalia
fails
advance
justification
apparent
belief
equal
protection
clause
prohibiting
discrimination
basis
race
exercise
peremptory
challenges
allows
discrimination
basis
gender
dissenting
opinion
thus
serves
tacit
admission
short
overruling
decade
cases
interpreting
equal
protection
clause
result
reach
today
doctrinally
compelled
irrelevant
women
unlike
numerical
minority
therefore
likely
remain
jury
side
uses
peremptory
challenges
equally
discriminatory
fashion
cf
broussard
declining
extend
batson
gender
noting
omen
numerical
minority
therefore
likely
represented
juries
despite
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
right
nondiscriminatory
jury
selection
alabama
ex
rel
procedures
belongs
potential
jurors
well
litigants
possibility
members
genders
get
jury
despite
intentional
discrimination
beside
point
exclusion
even
one
juror
impermissible
reasons
harms
juror
undermines
public
confidence
fairness
system
popular
refrain
peremptory
challenges
based
stereotypes
kind
expressing
various
intuitive
frequently
erroneous
biases
see
post
peremptory
challenges
made
basis
group
characteristics
race
gender
like
occupation
example
reinforce
stereotypes
group
competence
predispositions
used
prevent
voting
participating
juries
pursuing
chosen
professions
otherwise
contributing
civic
life
see
babcock
place
palladium
women
rights
jury
service
justice
scalia
argues
discrimination
dishonor
subject
peremptory
strike
post
justice
scalia
argument
rejected
many
times
see
powers
reject
support
justice
scalia
offers
conclusion
fact
peremptory
challenges
long
history
country
post
discriminatory
peremptory
challenges
coexisted
equal
protection
clause
years
post
interlude
holding
exclusion
juries
basis
race
unconstitutional
strauder
supra
holding
alabama
ex
rel
peremptory
challenges
basis
race
unconstitutional
batson
supra
dispute
long
tolerated
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenges
reason
continue
many
people
traditions
see
post
de
jure
segregation
total
exclusion
women
juries
unconstitutional
even
though
coexisted
equal
protection
clause
example
challenging
persons
military
experience
disproportionately
affect
men
time
challenging
persons
employed
nurses
disproportionately
affect
women
without
showing
pretext
however
challenges
may
well
unconstitutional
since
see
hernandez
new
york
respondent
argues
alabama
method
jury
selection
make
extension
batson
gender
particularly
burdensome
alabama
system
employed
system
requires
litigants
strike
alternately
persons
remain
constitute
jury
see
respondent
suggests
cases
least
necessary
system
continue
striking
persons
venire
litigants
longer
articulable
reason
result
respondent
contends
litigants
may
unable
come
explanations
strikes
find
worthy
note
alabama
managed
maintain
system
even
ruling
batson
despite
fact
counties
alabama
predominately
counties
presumably
difficult
come
explanations
peremptory
strikes
advance
explanations
doubt
voir
dire
process
aids
litigants
ability
articulate
explanations
peremptory
challenges
true
gender
regardless
state
choice
methods
insulate
strictures
equal
protection
clause
alabama
free
adopt
whatever
procedures
chooses
long
violate
constitution
temptation
use
gender
pretext
racial
discrimination
may
explain
majority
lower
decisions
extending
batson
gender
involve
use
peremptory
challenges
remove
minority
women
four
peremptory
cases
reach
federal
courts
appeals
cited
supra
involved
striking
minority
women
almost
half
century
ago
stated
american
tradition
trial
jury
considered
connection
either
criminal
civil
proceedings
necessarily
contemplates
impartial
jury
drawn
community
mean
course
every
jury
must
contain
representatives
economic
social
religious
racial
political
geographical
groups
community
frequently
complete
representation
impossible
mean
prospective
jurors
shall
selected
officials
without
systematic
alabama
ex
rel
intentional
exclusion
groups
recognition
must
given
fact
eligible
jury
service
found
every
stratum
society
jury
competence
individual
rather
group
class
matter
fact
lies
heart
jury
system
disregard
open
door
class
distinctions
discriminations
abhorrent
democratic
ideals
trial
jury
thiel
southern
pacific
alabama
ex
rel
agree
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
government
excluding
person
jury
service
account
person
gender
ante
state
proffered
justifications
peremptory
challenges
far
exceedingly
persuasive
showing
required
sustain
classification
mississippi
univ
women
hogan
ante
therefore
join
opinion
case
today
important
blow
gender
discrimination
costless
write
separately
discuss
costs
express
belief
today
holding
limited
government
use
peremptory
strikes
batson
kentucky
significant
intrusion
jury
selection
process
batson
routine
state
federal
trial
courts
batson
appeals
proliferated
well
demographics
indicate
today
holding
may
even
greater
impact
batson
constitutionalizing
jury
selection
procedures
increases
number
cases
jury
selection
sideshow
become
part
main
event
reason
today
decision
erodes
alabama
ex
rel
role
peremptory
challenge
peremptory
challenge
practice
ancient
origin
part
common
law
heritage
edmonson
leesville
concrete
dissenting
principal
value
peremptory
helps
produce
fair
impartial
juries
swain
alabama
babcock
voir
dire
preserving
wonderful
power
peremptory
challenges
enabling
side
exclude
jurors
believes
partial
toward
side
means
eliminat
ing
extremes
partiality
sides
thereby
assuring
selection
qualified
unbiased
jury
holland
illinois
internal
quotation
marks
citations
omitted
peremptory
importance
confirmed
persistence
well
established
time
blackstone
continues
endure
moreover
essential
nature
peremptory
challenge
one
exercised
without
reason
stated
without
inquiry
without
subject
control
swain
indeed
often
reason
stated
trial
lawyer
judgments
juror
sympathies
sometimes
based
experienced
hunches
educated
guesses
derived
juror
responses
voir
dire
juror
bare
looks
gestures
ibid
trial
lawyer
instinctive
assessment
juror
predisposition
meet
high
standards
challenge
cause
mean
lawyer
instinct
erroneous
cf
starr
mccormick
jury
selection
nonverbal
cues
better
verbal
responses
revealing
juror
disposition
belief
experienced
lawyers
often
correctly
intuit
jurors
likely
least
sympathetic
understanding
lawyer
often
unable
explain
intuition
reason
cherish
peremptory
alabama
ex
rel
challenge
add
layer
layer
additional
constitutional
restraints
use
peremptory
force
lawyers
articulate
know
often
inarticulable
make
peremptory
challenge
less
discretionary
like
challenge
cause
also
increase
possibility
biased
jurors
allowed
onto
jury
sometimes
lawyer
unable
provide
acceptable
explanation
even
though
lawyer
fact
correct
juror
unsympathetic
similarly
jurisdictions
lawyers
exercise
strikes
open
lawyers
may
deterred
using
peremptories
fear
unable
justify
strike
seat
juror
knows
striking
party
thought
unfit
believe
peremptory
remains
important
litigator
tool
fundamental
part
process
selecting
impartial
juries
increasing
limitation
gives
pause
value
peremptory
challenge
litigant
diminished
peremptory
exercised
manner
know
like
race
gender
matters
plethora
studies
make
clear
rape
cases
example
female
jurors
somewhat
likely
vote
convict
male
jurors
see
hastie
penrod
pennington
inside
jury
collecting
summarizing
empirical
studies
moreover
though
similarly
definitive
studies
regarding
example
sexual
harassment
child
custody
spousal
child
abuse
one
need
sexist
share
intuition
certain
cases
person
gender
resulting
life
experience
relevant
view
case
jurors
expected
come
jury
box
leave
behind
human
experience
taught
beck
alabama
individuals
expected
ignore
jurors
know
alabama
ex
rel
men
women
today
decision
severely
limits
litigant
ability
act
intuition
import
holding
correlation
juror
gender
attitudes
irrelevant
matter
constitutional
law
say
gender
makes
difference
matter
law
say
gender
makes
difference
matter
fact
previously
said
regard
batson
tolerate
prosecutors
racially
discriminatory
use
peremptory
challenge
effect
special
rule
relevance
statement
nation
stands
rather
statement
fact
brown
north
carolina
concurring
denial
certiorari
today
decision
statement
effort
eliminate
potential
discriminatory
use
peremptory
see
batson
marshall
concurring
gender
governed
special
rule
relevance
formerly
reserved
race
though
gain
much
statement
ignore
lose
extending
batson
gender
added
additional
burden
state
federal
trial
process
taken
step
closer
eliminating
peremptory
challenge
diminished
ability
litigants
act
sometimes
accurate
assumptions
juror
attitudes
concerns
reinforce
conviction
today
decision
limited
prohibition
government
use
peremptory
challenges
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
discrimination
state
actors
edmonson
supra
made
mistake
concluding
private
civil
litigants
state
actors
exercised
peremptory
challenges
georgia
mccollum
compounded
mistake
holding
criminal
defendants
also
state
actors
commitment
eliminating
discrimination
legal
process
alabama
ex
rel
allow
us
forget
occurs
courtroom
state
action
private
civil
litigants
private
litigants
government
erects
platform
thereby
become
responsible
occurs
upon
edmonson
dissenting
clearly
criminal
defendants
state
actors
arrest
trial
possible
sentencing
punishment
antagonistic
relationship
government
accused
clear
see
unique
relationship
criminal
defendants
state
precludes
attributing
defendants
actions
state
mccollum
supra
dissenting
peremptory
challenge
one
important
rights
secured
accused
swain
emphasis
added
goldwasser
limiting
criminal
defendant
use
peremptory
challenges
symmetry
jury
criminal
trial
limiting
accused
use
peremptory
serious
misordering
priorities
means
exalted
right
citizens
sit
juries
rights
criminal
defendant
even
though
defendant
jurors
faces
imprisonment
even
death
mccollum
supra
thomas
concurring
judgment
accordingly
adhere
position
equal
protection
clause
limit
exercise
peremptory
challenges
private
civil
litigants
criminal
defendants
case
presents
state
action
dilemma
state
alabama
filed
paternity
suit
behalf
petitioner
next
case
name
fighting
gender
discrimination
hold
battered
wife
trial
wounding
abusive
husband
state
actor
preclude
using
peremptory
challenges
ensure
jury
peers
contains
many
alabama
ex
rel
women
members
possible
assume
hope
alabama
ex
rel
justice
kennedy
concurring
judgment
full
agreement
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
gender
discrimination
exercise
peremptory
challenges
write
explain
understanding
precedents
lead
conclusion
though
initial
drafts
fourteenth
amendment
written
prohibit
discrimination
persons
race
color
previous
condition
servitude
amendment
submitted
consideration
later
ratified
contained
comprehensive
terms
state
shall
deny
person
within
jurisdiction
equal
protection
laws
see
oregon
mitchell
harlan
concurring
part
dissenting
part
kendrick
journal
joint
committee
fifteen
reconstruction
congress
pp
recognition
evident
historical
fact
equal
protection
clause
adopted
prohibit
government
discrimination
basis
race
often
interpreted
decades
followed
accord
purpose
strauder
west
virginia
example
invalidated
west
virginia
law
prohibiting
blacks
serving
juries
decision
said
equal
protection
clause
alabama
ex
rel
declaring
law
shall
black
white
held
state
confine
jury
service
whites
noted
state
confine
jury
service
males
freeholders
citizens
persons
within
certain
ages
persons
educational
qualifications
see
also
yick
wo
hopkins
illustrated
necessity
nineteenth
amendment
much
time
passed
equal
protection
clause
thought
reach
beyond
purpose
prohibiting
racial
discrimination
apply
well
discrimination
based
sex
cases
beginning
however
subjected
government
classifications
based
sex
heightened
scrutiny
neither
state
member
questions
principle
though
intermediate
scrutiny
test
applied
may
provide
clear
standard
instances
see
craig
boren
rehnquist
dissenting
case
law
reveal
strong
presumption
gender
classifications
invalid
see
mississippi
univ
women
hogan
doubt
precedents
therefore
equal
protection
clause
prohibits
sex
discrimination
selection
jurors
duren
missouri
taylor
louisiana
question
whether
clause
also
prohibits
peremptory
challenges
based
sex
correct
hold
equal
protection
clause
constitutional
tradition
based
theory
individual
possesses
rights
protected
lawless
action
government
neutral
phrasing
equal
protection
clause
extending
guarantee
person
reveals
concern
rights
individuals
groups
though
group
disabilities
sometimes
mechanism
alabama
ex
rel
state
violates
individual
right
question
heart
constitution
guarantee
equal
protection
lies
simple
command
government
must
treat
citizens
individuals
simply
components
racial
sexual
class
metro
broadcasting
fcc
dissenting
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
purposes
equal
protection
clause
individual
denied
jury
service
peremptory
challenge
exercised
account
sex
less
injured
individual
denied
jury
service
law
banning
members
sex
serving
jurors
powers
ohio
palmore
sidoti
ex
parte
virginia
injury
personal
dignity
individual
right
participate
political
process
powers
supra
neutrality
fourteenth
amendment
guarantee
confirmed
fact
difficulty
finding
constitutional
wrong
case
involves
males
excluded
jury
service
gender
importance
individual
rights
analysis
prompts
observation
concerning
conceive
intended
effect
today
decision
prohibit
racial
gender
bias
jury
selection
encourage
jury
deliberations
seated
juror
give
free
rein
racial
gender
bias
jury
system
kind
compact
power
transferred
judge
jury
jury
turn
deciding
case
accord
instructions
defining
relevant
issues
consideration
wise
limitations
authority
courts
inquire
reasons
underlying
jury
verdict
mean
jury
disregard
instructions
juror
allows
racial
gender
bias
influence
assessment
case
breaches
compact
renounces
oath
alabama
ex
rel
regard
important
recognize
juror
sits
representative
racial
sexual
group
individual
citizen
nothing
pernicious
jury
system
society
presume
persons
different
backgrounds
go
jury
room
voice
prejudice
cf
metro
broadcasting
supra
dissenting
jury
pool
must
representative
community
structural
mechanism
preventing
bias
enfranchising
see
ballard
thiel
southern
pacific
jury
competence
individual
rather
group
class
matter
fact
lies
heart
jury
system
thus
constitution
guarantees
right
impartial
jury
jury
composed
members
particular
race
gender
see
holland
illinois
strauder
alabama
ex
rel
chief
justice
rehnquist
dissenting
agree
dissent
justice
scalia
joined
add
words
support
conclusion
accepting
batson
kentucky
correctly
decided
sufficient
differences
race
gender
discrimination
principle
batson
extended
peremptory
challenges
potential
jurors
based
sex
race
sex
discrimination
different
acknowledged
equal
protection
jurisprudence
accords
different
levels
protection
two
groups
classifications
based
race
inherently
suspect
triggering
strict
scrutiny
classifications
judged
heightened
less
searching
standard
review
mississippi
univ
women
hogan
racial
groups
comprise
numerical
minorities
society
warranting
situations
greater
need
protection
whereas
population
divided
almost
equally
men
women
furthermore
substantial
discrimination
groups
still
lingers
society
racial
equality
proved
challenging
goal
achieve
many
fronts
gender
equality
see
kirp
yudof
franks
gender
justice
batson
involved
black
defendant
challenging
alabama
ex
rel
removal
black
jurors
announced
jury
selection
process
balancing
dictates
equal
protection
historical
practice
peremptory
challenges
long
recognized
securing
fairness
trials
concluded
command
equal
protection
clause
superior
careful
rule
undermine
contribution
challenge
generally
makes
administration
justice
batson
best
understood
recognition
race
lies
core
commands
fourteenth
amendment
surprisingly
cases
dealt
use
peremptory
strikes
remove
black
racially
identified
venirepersons
described
batson
fashioning
rule
aimed
preventing
purposeful
discrimination
cognizable
racial
group
justice
recognized
batson
apply
utside
uniquely
sensitive
area
race
brown
north
carolina
opinion
concurring
denial
certiorari
equal
protection
clause
differences
mean
balance
tilt
favor
peremptory
challenges
sex
race
issue
unlike
think
state
shown
jury
strikes
basis
gender
substantially
state
legitimate
interest
achieving
fair
impartial
trial
venerable
practice
peremptory
challenges
swain
alabama
tracing
old
credentials
peremptory
alabama
ex
rel
challenges
batson
burger
dissenting
post
scalia
dissenting
two
sexes
differ
biologically
diminishing
extent
experience
merely
stereotyping
say
differences
may
produce
difference
outlook
brought
jury
room
accordingly
use
peremptory
challenges
basis
sex
generally
sort
derogatory
invidious
act
peremptory
challenges
directed
black
jurors
may
justice
concurrence
recognizes
several
costs
associated
extending
batson
peremptory
challenges
lengthier
trials
increase
number
complexity
appeals
addressing
jury
selection
diminished
ability
litigants
act
sometimes
accurate
assumptions
juror
attitudes
ante
costs
view
needlessly
imposed
opinion
constitution
simply
require
result
reaches
see
georgia
mccollum
blacks
hernandez
new
york
latinos
edmonson
leesville
concrete
blacks
powers
ohio
blacks
holland
illinois
blacks
griffith
kentucky
blacks
allen
hardy
blacks
hispanics
alabama
ex
rel
justice
scalia
chief
justice
justice
thomas
join
dissenting
today
opinion
inspiring
demonstration
thoroughly
justices
matters
pertaining
sexes
genders
sternly
disapprove
male
chauvinist
attitudes
predecessors
price
paid
display
modest
price
surely
opinion
quite
irrelevant
case
hand
hasty
reader
surprised
learn
example
lawsuit
involves
complaint
use
peremptory
challenges
exclude
men
petit
jury
sure
petitioner
man
used
one
peremptory
strikes
remove
women
jury
used
last
challenge
strike
sole
remaining
male
pool
validity
strikes
us
nonetheless
treats
extended
discussion
historic
exclusion
women
jury
service
also
service
bar
rather
like
jury
service
involves
going
courthouse
lot
see
ante
say
irrelevant
since
case
involves
state
action
allegedly
discriminates
men
parties
contest
alabama
ex
rel
discrimination
basis
sex
subject
cases
call
heightened
scrutiny
citation
one
cases
preferably
one
involving
men
rather
women
see
mississippi
univ
women
hogan
needed
also
spends
time
establishing
use
sex
proxy
particular
views
sympathies
unwise
perhaps
irrational
opinion
stresses
lack
statistical
evidence
support
widely
held
belief
least
certain
types
cases
juror
sex
statistically
significant
predictive
value
juror
behave
see
ante
assertion
seems
place
opposition
earlier
sixth
amendment
fair
cases
see
taylor
louisiana
controlled
studies
concluded
women
bring
juries
perspectives
values
influence
jury
deliberation
result
times
trends
change
unisex
unquestionably
fashion
personally
less
inclined
demand
statistics
inclined
credit
perceptions
experienced
litigators
money
line
matter
fervent
defense
proposition
il
pas
de
difference
entre
les
hommes
et
les
femmes
stereotypes
opposite
view
hateful
stereotyping
turns
alabama
ex
rel
like
recounting
history
sex
discrimination
women
utterly
irrelevant
even
sex
remarkably
good
predictor
certain
cases
find
use
peremptories
unconstitutional
see
ante
cf
ante
concurring
course
relationship
sex
partiality
relevant
demanded
case
ordinarily
demands
complaining
party
suffered
injury
leaving
aside
moment
reality
defendant
opportunity
strike
women
jury
defendant
cause
complain
prosecutor
striking
male
jurors
male
jurors
tend
favorable
towards
defendants
paternity
suits
men
women
jurors
thinks
fungible
arguable
injury
prosecutor
impermissible
use
male
sex
basis
peremptories
injury
stricken
juror
defendant
indeed
far
suffered
harm
petitioner
state
actor
precedents
see
georgia
mccollum
slip
cf
edmonson
leesville
concrete
actually
inflicted
harm
female
jurors
today
presumably
supplies
alabama
ex
rel
petitioner
cause
action
applying
uniquely
expansive
standing
analysis
powers
ohio
according
petitioner
remedy
wrong
done
male
jurors
case
illustrates
making
restitution
paul
peter
robbed
bad
idea
petitioner
implication
reasoning
suffered
harm
scientific
evidence
presented
trial
established
petitioner
paternity
accuracy
insofar
petitioner
concerned
case
harmless
error
ever
one
retrial
nothing
divert
state
judicial
prosecutorial
resources
allowing
either
petitioner
malefactor
go
free
core
reasoning
peremptory
challenges
basis
group
characteristic
subject
heightened
scrutiny
inconsistent
guarantee
equal
protection
clause
conclusion
reached
focusing
unrealistically
upon
individual
exercises
peremptory
challenge
ignoring
totality
practice
since
groups
subject
peremptory
challenge
made
object
depending
upon
nature
particular
case
hard
see
group
denied
equal
protection
see
scalia
dissenting
batson
kentucky
rehnquist
dissenting
explains
peremptory
challenges
coexisted
equal
protection
clause
years
case
perfect
example
system
whole
claim
petitioner
complaint
prosecutor
struck
male
jurors
every
man
struck
government
petitioner
lawyer
struck
woman
say
men
singled
discriminatory
treatment
process
preposterous
situation
different
sides
systematically
struck
individuals
one
group
alabama
ex
rel
strikes
evinced
animus
served
proxy
segregated
venire
lists
see
swain
alabama
pattern
however
displays
systemic
animus
side
desire
get
jury
favorably
disposed
case
characterization
respondent
argument
reminiscent
arguments
advanced
justify
total
exclusion
women
juries
ante
patently
false
women
categorically
excluded
juries
doubt
competent
women
stricken
juries
peremptory
challenge
doubt
well
disposed
striking
party
case
see
powers
supra
scalia
dissenting
discrimination
dishonor
former
latter
explains
interlude
holding
exclusion
juries
basis
race
unconstitutional
strauder
west
virginia
holding
peremptory
challenges
basis
race
unconstitutional
batson
kentucky
supra
although
legal
reasoning
case
largely
obscured
oratory
extent
reasoning
discernible
invalidates
much
strikes
identifying
unequal
treatment
separating
individual
exercises
peremptory
challenge
process
whole
applies
heightened
scrutiny
mode
equal
protection
analysis
used
discrimination
concludes
strikes
fail
heightened
scrutiny
substantially
important
government
interest
says
important
government
interest
served
peremptory
strikes
securing
fair
impartial
alabama
ex
rel
jury
ante
refuses
accept
respondent
argument
strikes
interest
eliminating
group
men
may
partial
male
defendants
accept
argument
based
stereotype
law
condemns
ante
quoting
powers
supra
analysis
entirely
eliminating
allowable
argument
implies
strikes
even
rationally
legitimate
government
interest
let
alone
pass
heightened
scrutiny
places
peremptory
strikes
based
group
characteristic
risk
since
denominated
stereotypes
perhaps
however
though
see
stereotyping
groups
entitled
heightened
strict
scrutiny
constitutes
stereotype
law
condemns
stereotyping
blondes
football
players
dumb
remains
perhaps
refers
impermissible
stereotypes
ante
means
adjective
limiting
rather
descriptive
expect
learn
stereotyping
jurisprudence
future
stereotypes
constitution
frowns
upon
even
line
later
cases
guaranteed
today
decision
limits
theoretically
boundless
batson
principle
race
sex
perhaps
classifications
subject
heightened
scrutiny
presumably
include
religious
belief
see
larson
valente
alabama
ex
rel
much
damage
done
done
first
foremost
peremptory
challenge
system
loses
whole
character
order
defend
impermissible
stereotyping
claims
reasons
strikes
must
given
right
peremptory
challenge
blackstone
says
arbitrary
capricious
right
must
exercised
full
freedom
fails
full
purpose
lewis
quoting
lamb
state
see
also
lewis
supra
marchant
wheat
story
blackstone
commentaries
loss
real
peremptory
felt
keenly
criminal
defendant
see
georgia
mccollum
recently
thought
held
accept
juror
apparently
indifferent
distrusted
reason
reason
lamb
supra
make
mistake
really
substitute
peremptory
voir
dire
though
expected
expand
consequence
today
decision
fill
gap
biases
go
along
group
characteristics
tend
biases
juror
perceive
use
asking
fruitless
inquire
male
juror
whether
harbors
subliminal
prejudice
favor
unwed
fathers
damage
done
secondarily
entire
justice
system
bear
burden
expanded
quest
reasoned
peremptories
demands
extension
batson
sex
almost
certainly
beyond
cf
batson
burger
dissenting
provide
basis
extensive
collateral
litigation
especially
criminal
defendant
litigates
expected
pursue
demographic
reality
places
limit
number
cases
alabama
ex
rel
challenges
issue
every
case
contains
potential
claim
another
consequence
mentioned
lengthening
voir
dire
process
already
burdens
trial
courts
irrationality
today
approach
equal
protection
evident
consequences
extending
logical
conclusion
fair
impartial
trial
prosecutor
legitimate
goal
adversarial
trial
stratagems
must
tested
goal
abstraction
role
within
system
whole
tested
stratagems
survive
heightened
scrutiny
prosecutor
presumably
violates
constitution
selects
male
female
police
officer
testify
believes
one
sex
might
convincing
context
particular
case
believes
one
might
appealing
predominantly
male
female
jury
decision
stress
one
line
argument
present
certain
witnesses
mostly
female
jury
example
stress
defendant
victimized
women
becomes
reasoning
intentional
discrimination
state
actor
basis
gender
reasons
dissent
throughout
opinion
shall
refer
issue
sex
discrimination
rather
gender
discrimination
word
gender
acquired
new
useful
connotation
cultural
attitudinal
characteristics
opposed
physical
characteristics
distinctive
sexes
say
gender
sex
feminine
female
masculine
male
present
case
involve
peremptory
strikes
exercised
basis
femininity
masculinity
far
appears
effeminate
men
survive
prosecution
peremptories
case
involves
therefore
sex
discrimination
plain
simple
continue
agree
justice
mccollum
edmondson
erred
making
civil
litigants
criminal
defendants
state
actors
purposes
equal
protection
clause
however
share
belief
correcting
error
continuing
consider
exercise
peremptories
prosecutors
denial
equal
protection
make
things
right
accordance
common
perception
contrary
unisex
creed
women
really
decide
cases
differently
men
allowing
defendants
alone
strike
jurors
basis
sex
produce
seen
produce
juries
intentionally
weighted
defendant
favor
women
jurors
example
rape
prosecution
desirable
outcome
seem
even
premise
correct
wise
observers
long
understood
appearance
justice
important
reality
system
peremptory
strikes
affects
actual
impartiality
jury
bit
gives
litigants
greater
belief
impartiality
serves
important
function
see
blackstone
commentaries
point
fact
may
well
greater
value
page