A QUESTION OF ETHICS
The state of Alabama, on behalf of a mother (T.B.), brought a paternity suit against the alleged father (J.E.B.) of T.B.'s child. During jury selection, the state, through peremptory challenges, removed nine of the ten prospective male jurors. J.E.B.'s attorney struck the final male from the jury pool. As a result of these peremptory strikes, the final jury consisted of twelve women. When the jury returned a verdict in favor of the mother, the father appealed, asserting that the trial court erred in overruling his objection to the state's removal of potential male jurors through the use of its peremptory challenges. The father argued that the use of peremptory challenges to eliminate men from the jury constituted gender discrimination and violated his rights to equal protection and due process of law. The father requested the court to extend the principle enunciated in a United States Supreme Court case that prohibited peremptory strikes based solely on race, to include gender-based strikes. The appellate court, following a precedent established by the state's supreme court, refused to do so and affirmed the lower court's decision that J.E.B. was the child's father and had to pay child support.
Quick Reply
