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

1994 United States Supreme Court case

This article has multiple issues. Please help **improve it ** or discuss these issues on the **talk page **. (Learn how and when to remove these messages )

(Learn how and when to remove this message )

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127 (1994), is 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 .[citation needed
_]

Background

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J.E.B._v._Alabama_ex_rel._T.B.&action=edit&section=1 "Edit section: 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.[_citation needed
_]

Decision

[(https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J.E.B._v._Alabama_ex_rel._T.B.&action=edit&section=2 "Edit section: 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 .[_citation needed
_]