Taylor, a male, made an objection to the petit jury which convicted him when his jury was made up of all men. Jury pools, from which juries are selected, should represent an accurate cross-section of the community.
The Court cited that fact that fifty-three percent of the population eligible for jury duty was female. The Sixth Amendment protects the right of criminal defendants to a trial “by an impartial jury.” Taylor argued that by systematically excluding women from jury pools, Louisiana had deprived him of that Sixth Amendment right (applied to the states by the Fourteenth Amendment). This was why they were excluded unless they volunteered. The Court cited that fact that fifty-three percent of the population eligible for jury duty was female. Louisiana resident Billy Taylor was found guilty of kidnapping. In this case, the Supreme Court held that states could not systematically exclude women from juries. Dissenting, Associate Justice Rehnquist argued that Louisiana’s jury system was certainly outdated, but not unconstitutional. Louisiana resident Billy Taylor was found guilty of kidnapping.
2d 886, 72 U.S.L.W. Issue.
Accessed 8 Nov. 2020. The Court also overturned Louisiana’s jury selection system as an unconstitutional violation of the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. In this case, the Supreme Court held that states could not systematically exclude women from juries. Held.
“if the fair cross-section rule is to govern the selection of juries, as we have concluded it must, women cannot be systematically excluded from jury panels from which petit juries are drawn.”. Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness Digital Textbook.
The constitutional issue in the case was not the right of individual women to serve as jurors, but the right of accused persons to be tried by a jury made up of a “representative cross section of the community.”.
Further, women served special roles in society that would be particularly disrupted by jury duty. Yet, the Court observed, only “only a very few women, grossly disproportionate to the number of eligible women in the community, [were] called for jury service.” The Court concluded that excluding women from juries deprived defendants of the “commonsense judgment of the community” that juries were designed to impart. It was the 1970s, and under the state’s constitution, women were never called for jury duty unless they had written a letter to the state asking to be considered for service. Finally, the “distinctive” roles that women played in society was a “rational” reason for the state’s jury system, but individual exemptions from jury duty could always be made. At the time, Louisiana had a statute that excluded women from jury service unless she filed a written statement expressing that she wanted to be subject to jury service. The Supreme Court agreed with Taylor and ordered Louisiana to re-try him. Whether a state law, maintaining that women need not serve on juries, is facially unconstitutional and whether a defendant may argue that his right to a fair jury has been affected by such a law. Dissenting, Associate Justice Rehnquist argued that Louisiana’s jury system was certainly outdated, but not unconstitutional. Justice Rehnquist dissented, noting that the Judgment was grounded more in mysticism than law and the court has failed to prove how the Louisiana system undermines the operation of the law. The state argued that he was not prejudiced because he was not a … “[Without] any suggestion that [Taylor’s] trial was unfairly conducted, or that its result was unreliable, I would not require Louisiana to retry him…” How would you respond to Justice Rehnquist’s argument.
He challenged his conviction because there were no women on his jury.
The Court ruled, “The selection of a…jury from a representative cross section of the community is an essential component of the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial.”. In commemoration of Women’s History Month, this Landmark Supreme Court Cases and the Constitution eLesson focuses on the landmark case of Taylor v. Louisiana (1975). The constitutional issue in the case was not the right of individual women to serve as jurors, but the right of accused persons to be tried by a jury made up of a “representative cross section of the community.”.
In the relevant judicial district, 53 percent of … The state of Louisiana argued that Taylor did not have grounds to object to his male-only jury since he was a male.
402 of the Louisiana Code of Criminal Procedure, which precluded women from jury service, was unconstitutional. He challenged his conviction because there were no women on his jury.
This was why they were excluded unless they volunteered.
“[Without] any suggestion that [Taylor’s] trial was unfairly conducted, or that its result was unreliable, I would not require Louisiana to retry him…” How would you respond to Justice Rehnquist’s argument.