Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Ballard Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Dec 09, 1946

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

53 entries 1 linked 52 unlinked
Show
  1. West Coast Hotel Co. Vs. Parrish US Supreme Court · Mar 29, 1937
    Distinguished
  2. Ballard v. United
    Search
  3. States - 329 U.S. 187 (1946) U.S. Supreme Court Ballard v. United
    Search
  4. States, 329 U.S. 187 (1946) Ballard v. United
    Search
  5. exercise its power of supervision over the administration of justice in the federal courts to correct the error. Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  6. not suggest) that petitioners have lost the right to urge the question here. Moreover, in this case, as in Reynolds v. United
    Search
  7. error, though not presented here on the first argument, appears on the face of the record before us. And see Sibbach v. Wilson
    Search
  8. and truly representative of it. Glasser v. United
    Search
  9. Glasser v. United
    Search
  10. States, supra, pp. 315 U. S. 85 -86. In Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  11. held, in the exercise of our power of supervision over the administration of justice in the federal courts, see McNabb v. United
    Search
  12. case, we should exercise our power of supervision over the administration of justice in the federal courts, McNabb v. United
    Search
  13. of jury selection. The systematic and intentional exclusion of women, like the exclusion of a racial group, Smith v. Texas
    Search
  14. U. S. 128 , or an economic or social class, Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  15. to have in our democratic society. It is a departure from the statutory scheme. As well stated in United States v. Roemig
    Search
  16. Cf. Kotteakos v. United
    Search
  17. of both grand and petit juries in that district since the beginning of the February Term, 1944. See United States v. Chaplin
    Search
  18. moved to quash because of the exclusion of women from the panel of grand jurors. The motion was denied. United States v. Ballard
    Search
  19. the panel is not obligatory, the statutory provisions which qualify them for jury service being directory only. People v. Shannon
    Search
  20. People v. Parman
    Search
  21. Cf. Wuichet v. United
    Search
  22. issues in the case. I would direct dismissal of the indictment upon the grounds stated in dissent in United States v. Ballard
    Search
  23. of Appeals. In ample time for the defendants to rely on it in the Circuit Court of Appeals, this Court decided Glasser v. United
    Search
  24. The two cases invoked by the Court are inapposite. The circumstances in Reynolds v. United
    Search
  25. three years, only to be resurrected as an afterthought and a makeweight to argument on the merits. Again, in Sibbach v. Wilson
    Search
  26. states which do not make women eligible for service as jurors of the highest court of law in such states. Cf. Crowley v. United
    Search
  27. People v. Shannon
    Search
  28. from men, as a matter of law, in connection with their hours and conditions of work. West Coast Hotel Co. v. Parrish
    Search
  29. duty, the state courts of California, in effect, have granted women a substantial exemption from that duty. People v. Parman
    Search
  30. supra. See United States v. Ballard
    Search
  31. impartial jury, regardless of the sex of the jurors, provided the jurors otherwise are qualified to serve. Cf. Hyde v. United
    Search
  32. Agnew v. United
    Search
  33. Court has conformed its practice to that of the state. For the Page 329 U. S. 206 state rule, see People v. Parman
    Search
  34. People v. Manuel
    Search
  35. as directory to, and not mandatory upon, the state courts. There are ample grounds for distinguishing Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  36. have declared them qualified as jurors of the highest court of law in their respective states. See United States v. Wood
    Search
  37. Tynan v. United
    Search
  38. Hoxie v. United
    Search
  39. been discontinued. Louis E. Goddman, U.S. District Judge, N.D., Calif., Federal Jury Selections as Affected by Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  40. U.S. Supreme Court Ballard v. United
    Search
  41. Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  42. Reynolds v. United
    Search
  43. Sibbach v. Wilson
    Search
  44. In Thiel v. Southern
    Search
  45. McNabb v. United
    Search
  46. Smith v. Texas
    Search
  47. United States v. Roemig
    Search
  48. See United States v. Chaplin
    Search
  49. Cf. Crowley v. United
    Search
  50. See United States v. Ballard
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial