A paternity action was instituted and during jury selection, the State used 9 of its 10 peremptory challenges to remove male jurors. The petitioner used all but one of his strikes to remove female jurors. The jury turned out to be all female. Petitioner made a claim for violation of Equal Protection, and the Court denied that objection. Petitioner argued that the logic and reasoning of Batson v. Kentucky, which prohibits peremptory strikes solely on the basis of race, similarly forbids intentional discrimination on the basis of gender. The court rejected petitioner's claim and empaneled the all-female jury. The Petitioner was found to be the father of the child. The Supreme Court eventually granted certiorari.