( CNN ) -- Many are speculating whether an all-woman jury is a benefit or detriment to George Zimmerman , who stands accused in a Florida court for murdering Trayvon Martin . Women jurors are a recent phenomenon in U.S. history . In the 1960s , numerous states still prohibited women jurors . The thinking was that women 's place was in the home , not in the jury box . Women 's jury service was n't placed on equal footing with men 's until a 1975 U.S. Supreme Court decision ( Taylor v. Louisiana ) . An earlier Florida case vividly illustrates this history . In the late 1950s , Gwendolyn Hoyt stood trial for murdering her husband with a baseball bat . Hoyt 's guilt was determined by an all-male jury because at the time women in Florida had to volunteer for jury duty , while men were required to serve . Few questioned whether a female defendant tried by a jury of men confronted a `` jury of her peers . '' Hoyt and her attorneys , however , did pose the question and appealed the guilty verdict all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court on the grounds that the all-male jury denied her due process . One of Hoyt 's attorneys noted that when she asked her male acquaintances whether a man tried by an all-female jury would receive a fair trial , they answered with a resounding `` no ! '' The 1961 Supreme Court ruling in the Hoyt case upheld a state 's right to define women 's jury service differently than men 's . The court ruled that `` woman is still regarded as the center of home and family '' and for this reason a woman can `` be relieved from the civic duty of jury service . '' Times certainly do change . The 1975 Taylor decision overturned Hoyt , and women were able to participate equally in the democratic act of deciding community justice . In 1994 , the Supreme Court ruled that peremptory challenges could no longer be based on a prospective juror 's sex . That is , lawyers could no longer dismiss women ( or men ) from a jury panel because of their sex . Women have clearly broken the glass ceiling in the courtroom . But the public 's attention to the all-female jury in the George Zimmerman case shows that we are not yet gender blind when it comes to the justice system . Many people ask right away -- how will these women weigh the evidence , deliberate and affect the outcome of the trial ? The answer is likely to be that the all-female jury will have little or no effect on the ultimate decision in this case . Research shows that no one juror trait , including gender , is an accurate indicator of how a juror will vote . Rather -- and savvy trial lawyers know this -- the best predictor of whether a juror will side with the prosecution or defense is a mix of gender , race , ethnicity , religion , political ideology , personality , attitudes , and so on . Jury selection experts understand as well how the complex mix is closely tied to the specific issues at stake in a particular trial . Jury composition alone rarely shapes the verdict in a trial . For example , a 2007 review of the scholarship on jury selection reported that the backgrounds and attitudes of jurors predict less than 15 % of verdicts . Women are now full citizens when it comes to jury service . If a man is being tried by an all-woman jury , he is likely being tried by a jury of his peers . The gender makeup of the jury is not likely to be pivotal in determining the verdict in the Zimmerman trial . The evidence is what matters in the outcome . But our public attention to the fact of an all-female jury shows that we are still conditioned to think in gendered ways . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Holly McCammon .
An all-female jury will hear the George Zimmerman case in Florida . Holly McCammon : The gender composition of a jury will not affect the outcome . She says research shows that no one juror trait , including gender , can determine the vote . McCammon : A woman is more likely to be sympathetic toward Zimmerman's defense team than an African American man or Hispanic person would be.