EXCLUSION OF WOMEN FROM JURIES DATES BACK TO ENGLISH COMMON LAW AND WAS UPHELD BY THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT IN 1879 WITH THE STRAUDER V. VIRGINIA DECISION. PASSAGE OF THE 19TH AMENDMENT DID NOT INSURE JURY RIGHTS FOR WOMEN ON THE STATE LEVEL, AND THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1957 GAVE WOMEN THE RIGHT TO SIT ON FEDERAL JURIES ONLY. IN 1961, THE U.S. SUPREME COURT UPHELD THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF A FLORIDA STATUTE PROVIDING FOR A 'WOMEN'S EXEMPTION,' ALTHOUGH WOMEN WERE ALLOWED THE RIGHT TO SERVE IF THEY SHOULD WISH TO DO SO. RESEARCHERS IN THE EARLY 1970'S DISCOVERED THAT COURT CLERKS WERE SELECTING VERY FEW WOMEN FOR JURY POOLS. ONE OF THESE CLERKS TESTIFIED THAT SHE HAD BEEN INSTRUCTED BY THE JURY COMMISSIONER TO EXCLUDE WOMEN, AND ANOTHER REPORTED THAT SHE OMITTED WOMEN FROM JURY LISTS ON THE PRESUMPTION THAT A WOMAN WOULD UTILIZE HER EXEMPTION ANYWAY. STATISTICS INDICATE THAT THE PROPORTION OF FEMALE POPULATION IN MOST STATES IS UNEQUAL TO THE PROPORTION OF FEMALE JURISTS. IF A WOMEN IS INCLUDED IN THE JURY POOL, SHE CAN STILL BE EXCUSED FROM DUTY DURING VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION. PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE ALLOWS THE LAWYER TO REMOVE AN INDIVIDUAL FROM THE JURY WITHOUT SPECIFYING A REASON, THEREFORE PERMITTING CONSCIOUS OR UNCONSCIOUS DISCRIMINATION. EXAMPLES FROM LEGAL LITERATURE ARE PRESENTED WHICH DEPICT THE FIVE MOST FREQUENTLY RECURRING STEREOTYPICAL STATEMENTS AFFECTING VOID DIRE EXAMINATIONS: (1) IN CRIMINAL CASES, FEMALE JURORS ARE MORE LIKELY THAN MEN TO ACQUIT, EXCEPT IN CASES INVOLVING CHILDREN OR FAMILIES; (2) IN CIVIL CASES, FEMALE JURISTS FAVOR THE PLAINTIFF BUT VOTE FOR SMALLER REWARDS; (3) FEMALE JURISTS ARE LESS LIKELY TO FAVOR FEMALE DEFENDANTS; (4) FEMALE JURORS MORE OFTEN CONVICT IN RAPE CASES, UNLESS THERE IS A SUGGESTION THAT THE VICTIM ENCOURAGED THE CRIME, OR THAT SHE HAD A BAD REPUTATION; AND (5) FEMALE JURISTS ARE INFLUENCED BY THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE DEFENDANT OR PLAINTIFF, PARTICULARLY IF MALE. THESE FIVE STATEMENTS ARE EVALUATED ON EVIDENCE OF EMPIRCAL RESEARCH. TENTATIVE FINDINGS INDICATE THAT THERE IS LITTLE EVIDENCE THAT WOMEN ARE HARDER ON FEMALE OF DEFENDANTS, SOME PROOF THAT MORE LIKELY TO CONVICT IF A CHILD WAS VICTIMIZED, CONTRADICTORY DATA REGARDING THE ASSUMPTION THAT WOMEN FAVOR THE PLAINTIFF IN CIVIL CASES, SOME EVIDENCE THAT WOMEN CONSIDER RAPE TO BE A MORE SERIOUS CRIME THAN MEN BUT ARE LESS LIKELY THAN MALE JURISTS TO CONSIDER THE REPUTATION OF THE VICTIM, AND SOME INDICATION THAT WOMEN ARE LESS INFLUENCED BY THE ATTRACTIVENESS OF THE DEFENDANT OR PLAINTIFF THAN LAWYER BELIEVE. RESEARCH FINDINGS ARE FRAGMENTARY, AND SAMPLING IS NOT REPRESENTATIVE OR ON A LARGE SCALE. A NEED EXISTS FOR MORE SUBSTANTIAL RESEARCH. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (DAG)