hUG2G23nhNY
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) Responses The attorneys used secret trial proceedings. The attorneys used secret trial proceedings. Peremptory challenges on the basis of race were a violation of the Sixth Amendment. Peremptory challenges on the basis of race were a violation of the Sixth Amendment. The attorneys used the Confrontation Clause. The attorneys used the Confrontation Clause. Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
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 the case of JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994), the most likely reason the justices ruled as they did is that peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were deemed a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
To analyze the case of JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. (1994) and determine the most likely reason the justices ruled as they did, we should consider the facts of the case and the legal arguments presented.
In JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B., the Supreme Court case involved a child support dispute where the prosecutors used peremptory challenges to exclude most of the men in the jury pool.
When analyzing the possible reasons for the justices' ruling, we should focus on the options provided:
1. The attorneys used secret trial proceedings.
2. Peremptory challenges on the basis of race were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
3. The attorneys used the Confrontation Clause.
4. Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
From the given options, the most likely reason the justices ruled as they did in this case is:
4. Peremptory challenges on the basis of gender were a violation of the Sixth Amendment.
The ruling in JEB v. Alabama ex rel. T.B. established that peremptory challenges based on gender are unconstitutional and a violation of the Sixth Amendment's guarantee of a fair and impartial jury. This case extended the precedent set in previous cases (such as Batson v. Kentucky) that held peremptory challenges based on race to be unconstitutional.
To confirm this information, you can refer to the actual Supreme Court decision and read the legal arguments put forth by both parties in the case. This will provide a more detailed and accurate understanding of the reasoning behind the justices' ruling.