Is there a compelling governmental interest for posing one set of questions to female jurors but not to male jurors?

Applying the strict scrutiny standard to the case at bench, respondent does not suggest and we cannot think of any compelling governmental interest for posing one set of questions to female jurors but not to male jurors. Clearly, administrative convenience cannot justify a suspect classification in the face of the strict scrutiny test. (Inmates of Sybil Brand Inst. for Women v. County of Los Angeles, supra, 130 Cal.App.3d 89, 102, 181 Cal.Rptr. 599.) The fact that counsel was free to ask the men the same questions

Page 274