NCJ Number
58412
Date Published
1977
Length
18 pages
Annotation
THE POLITICS OF JURY SERVICE FOR WOMEN INCLUDING A BRIEF HISTORICAL OVERVIEW, HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE POSTSUFFRAGE BATTLE TO ELIMINATE PROHIBITION OF WOMEN JURORS IN NEW YORK, AND A RECENT CASE ARE PRESENTED.
Abstract
UNTIL RECENTLY, WOMEN WERE DENIED EQUAL PARTICIPATION ON FEDERAL AND STATE JURIES IN THE UNITED STATES BY A VARIETY OF EXCLUSIONARY DEVICES. THESE DEVICES INCLUDED ABSOLUTE EXCLUSION, COMPULSORY REGISTRATION, EXEMPTIONS BASED UPON SEX WHICH ALLOWED WOMEN TO OBTAIN A PERMIT WAIVER FROM JURY DUTY, AND QUESTIONABLE RANDOM SELECTION ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES WHEREBY MEN AND WOMEN DID NOT HAVE THE SAME CHANCE TO BECOME JURORS. THE EXCLUSION OF WOMEN FROM JURIES WAS AN INHERITANCE OF ENGLISH COMMON LAW, FROM WHICH AMERICAN LAW IS DERIVED. SINCE COMMON LAW DID NOT EXPRESSLY INCLUDE WOMEN JURORS, COURTS OFTEN UPHELD THEIR EXCLUSION IN THE ABSENCE OF AFFIRMING STATUTES. LATER, THE COURTS DIVIDED ON THE INTERPRETATION OF THE NINETEENTH AMENDMENT AS IT RELATES TO JURY SERVICE. IN 1975, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ELIMINATED THE VARIOUS DEVICES BY WHICH JURY SERVICE COULD BE NONCOMPULSORY FOR WOMEN. NEW YORK WAS ONE OF THE STATES WHICH HAD ELIMINATED THE ABSOLUTE EXCLUSION IF FAVOR OF NONCOMPULSORY SERVICE BEFORE THE 1957 CIVIL RIGHTS ACT. THIS CHANGE WAS THE CULMINATION OF AN 18-YEAR STRUGGLE BY WOMEN'S GROUPS AND THEIR SUPPORTERS WHO HAD FOUGHT FOR EQUAL STATUS BUT WERE FORCED TO COMPROMISE WITH THE EXCLUSIONISTS. FINALLY, IN THE RECENT ERIE COUNTY CASE, (NEW YORK, 1973-1974), THE RANDOM SELECTION PROCESS WAS DETERMINED TO BE DISCRIMINATORY AGAINST WOMEN. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (LWM)