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

J. E. B. v. Alabama ex rel. T. B., 511 U.S. 127, 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, which found race-based peremptory challenges in criminal trials unconstitutional, and Edmonson v. Leesville Concrete Company, 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.