THE MISSOURI SUPREME COURT'S 1977 DECISION IN STATE V. DUREN UPHELD THE STATE'S GENDER-BASED JURY SELECTION PROCESS BY DISTINGUISHING IT FROM THE 1975 U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION IN TAYLOR V. LOUISIANA WHICH STRUCK DOWN THAT STATE'S AUTOMATIC EXEMPTION STATUTE. IN THE DUREN DECISION, THE STATE COURT HELD THAT BECAUSE WOMEN ARE ALLOWED TO SERVE ON JURIES THE CROSS-SECTIONAL REQUIREMENT IS SATISFIED. THE CROSS-SECTIONAL REQUIREMENT, BASED ON THE SIXTH AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION, HAS BEEN UPHELD IN NUMEROUS COURT DECISIONS. IN MISSOURI, WOMEN WERE EXCLUDED FROM JURY DUTY UNTIL 1945 WHEN A NEW LAW GRANTED THEM BOTH PERMISSION TO SERVE AND A SELF-EXEMPTION PRIVILEGE. SEVERAL COURT DECISIONS UPHELD THIS PRIVILEGE. THE MISSOURI AND LOUISIANA STATUTES DIFFERED IN THAT LOUISIANA WOMEN HAD TO VOLUNTEER TO BE INCLUDED ON THE PROSPECTIVE JUROR LIST, WHEREAS MISSOURI WOMEN WERE AUTOMATICALLY PLACED ON THE LIST. NEVERTHELESS, THE END RESULTS OF THE TWO SYSTEMS WERE SIMILAR. IN THE TAYLOR CASE, 1 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE SUMMONED FOR JURY DUTY WERE WOMEN, WHILE 53 PERCENT OF THE ELIGIBLE POPULATION WERE WOMEN. IN THE DUREN CASE, 15.5 PERCENT OF THE PEOPLE SUMMONED WERE WOMEN, WHILE 54.5 PERCENT OF THE ELIGIBLE POPULATION WERE WOMEN. THE MISSOURI COURT THEREFORE ARGUED THAT 15 PERCENT REPRESENTATION BY WOMEN MEANT THAT JURIES WERE NOT ALMOST TOTALLY MALE. UPDATED STATISTICS AND THE PROPOSED EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT SHOULD INCREASE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT THE U.S. SUPREME COURT WILL REVERSE DUREN IN ITS FORTHCOMING OPINION ON THE CASE. THE CURRENT MISSOURI STATUTE ENDANGERS NOT ONLY THE DEFENDANT BUT ALSO THE JURY SYSTEM, THE LAW, THE COMMUNITY, AND THE DEMOCRATIC IDEAL. NOTES INCLUDING REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)