The Supreme Court case of JEB v.
Alabama ex rel. T.B. involved a child support dispute in which prosecutors used peremptory challenges to reject most of the men in the jury pool.
Analyze the case of JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994). Which of the following is the most likely reason the justices ruled as they did?
(1 point)
Peremptory challenges on the basis of race were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
The attorneys used secret trial proceedings.
The attorneys used the Confrontation Clause.
The most likely reason the justices ruled as they did in JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994) is that peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment. In this case, the prosecutors used their peremptory challenges to systematically exclude male potential jurors from the jury pool. The Supreme Court held that this practice violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of gender. Therefore, option 2, "Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment," is the most likely reason for the Court's ruling in this case.
The most likely reason the justices ruled as they did in the case of JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994) is that peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
In order to analyze the case of JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994) and determine the most likely reason for the justices' ruling, it is important to understand the background and context of the case.
JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. involved a child support dispute, wherein the prosecutors used peremptory challenges to exclude the majority of men in the jury pool. Peremptory challenges refer to the right of attorneys to dismiss potential jurors without providing a specific reason.
The most likely reason for the justices' ruling in this case can be determined by reviewing the relevant constitutional provisions and legal precedents. The options provided to you can help narrow down the possible reasons for the ruling:
1. Peremptory challenges on the basis of race were a violation of the Sixth Amendment: While racial discrimination in the use of peremptory challenges was addressed by the Supreme Court in the case Batson v. Kentucky (1986), JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. concerned gender-based discrimination, not racial discrimination. Therefore, this option is likely not the correct reason for the justices' ruling.
2. Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment: The most likely reason for the justices' ruling in JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. is that peremptory challenges based on gender were deemed a violation of the Sixth Amendment. The case established that using gender as a basis for excluding potential jurors through peremptory challenges violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, rather than the Sixth Amendment.
3. The attorneys used secret trial proceedings: The use of secret trial proceedings is not directly relevant to the issue at hand in JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., which centers around the gender-based exclusion of potential jurors. Therefore, this option is likely not the correct reason for the justices' ruling.
4. The attorneys used the Confrontation Clause: The Confrontation Clause pertains to a defendant's right to confront accusers and witnesses in a criminal trial. In the context of JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., it is unlikely that the issue of the Confrontation Clause would be applicable, as the case involved a child support dispute, rather than a criminal matter. Therefore, this option is likely not the correct reason for the justices' ruling.
In conclusion, the most likely reason for the justices' ruling in JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. is that the use of peremptory challenges based on gender was deemed a violation of the Sixth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.