Taylor v. Louisiana

419 U.S. 522 Supreme Court 1975

the systematic exclusion of womenfrom jury panelswassaid to beacceptable.Butwho would claim that a jury was truly representative of the community if all men were intentionally and systematically excluded from the panel? The truth is that the two sexes are notgiven … V There remains the argument that women as a class serve a distinctive role in society and that jury service would so substantially interfere with that function that the State has ample justification for excluding women from service unless they volunteer, even though the result is that almost all jurors are men. It is true that Hoyt v. Florida, (1961), held that such a system did not deny due process of law orequal protectionof the lawsif womencannotbe representative of the community.

Back

Timeline

Until the 1970s, women in Louisiana were excluded from the jury pool, unless they were specially registered for jury duty. Taylor contested the fact that 53% of the people eligible for jury service in his jurisdiction were women, yet women constituted less than 10% of his jury.

The Supreme Court concluded that it was unconstitutional to implement a jury registration process that excluded women. Taylor v. Louisiana helped eliminate opt-in clauses in order for women to participate in juries.

After the ruling, many states actually put in place opt-out clauses for women to try and create male-heavy juries.. This was ruled unconstitutional four years later in Duren v. Missouri with Ruth Bader Ginsburg representing the petitioner.