Abolish Forced Jury Duty

Liberty
,
1

Policy Proposal: Abolishing Forced Jury Duty and Advocating for Voluntary Civic Participation

Introduction
Jury duty, as it currently exists in the United States, is a form of compulsory service that places undue financial, emotional, and logistical burdens on citizens. The system threatens individuals with fines or jail time for noncompliance, forcing people to sacrifice their livelihoods, family obligations, and personal well-being without fair compensation. This policy seeks to abolish forced jury duty and replace it with a voluntary, incentivized system that respects individual rights while maintaining a fair judicial process.

Why Forced Jury Duty is a Problem

  1. Financial Burden
    o Jurors often lose income by taking time off work, especially those with hourly or freelance jobs. The nominal compensation provided by courts is inadequate and does not reflect the real costs incurred by participants.
    o For individuals already experiencing financial hardship, forced jury duty exacerbates economic strain and can lead to untenable situations, such as an inability to pay bills or provide for their families.

  2. Logistical Challenges
    o Many individuals lack reliable transportation to courthouses, which are often located far from rural or underserved areas.
    o For those with disabilities, medical conditions, or caregiving responsibilities, attending jury duty is a significant hardship.

  3. Violation of Constitutional Rights
    o Forced jury duty infringes on the 13th Amendment, which prohibits involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime.
    o Citizens should not be coerced into service under the threat of legal penalties. A truly free society respects the voluntary participation of its people.

  4. Ethical Concerns
    o The threat of fines, imprisonment, or other penalties to enforce participation undermines the ethical foundation of civic duty. Citizens should willingly participate in the judicial process, not be forced into it.
    o The current system is perceived by many as part of broader systemic corruption, with courts prioritizing control over justice and fairness.

Proposed Solution: A Voluntary and Fair Jury System

  1. Establish a Voluntary Jury Pool
    • Create a system where individuals can opt in to serve as jurors, motivated by fair compensation and civic pride.
    • Offer citizens opportunities to participate through education campaigns about the importance of jury duty.

  2. Provide Adequate Compensation
    • Pay jurors at least the equivalent of the local minimum wage or their regular hourly salary, whichever is higher.
    • Reimburse travel expenses, childcare costs, and other related expenses to ensure participation is accessible for all.

  3. Implement Technological Solutions
    • Allow jurors to participate remotely when feasible, reducing logistical challenges and expanding access for people with mobility issues or limited transportation options.

  4. Protect the Right to Decline
    • No citizen should be penalized for opting out of jury duty due to personal, financial, or logistical reasons. Participation should be based on genuine willingness and ability to serve.

  5. Address Systemic Corruption Concerns
    • Implement transparency measures to ensure that jury pools, judges, and court systems operate fairly and without undue influence.
    • Empower independent oversight to investigate complaints of corruption or coercion within the judicial process.

Benefits of Reform
• Increased Willingness to Serve: Fair compensation and respect for personal autonomy would encourage more people to volunteer for jury service.

• Reduced Hardship: Addressing financial and logistical burdens ensures that civic participation does not come at the cost of personal well-being.

• Restored Trust: Reforming the system would help rebuild public trust in the judiciary by demonstrating a commitment to fairness and justice.

Conclusion
The current system of forced jury duty is outdated, unethical, and harmful. By transitioning to a voluntary, incentivized system, we can uphold the principles of justice and civic responsibility without violating individual rights. It is time to prioritize fairness, transparency, and respect in our judicial process.

1 Like
2

I’m not sure what part of the Country you’re in, but where I’m at and most other places, Jury Duty is not “Forced”.

I agree that this is something that should be addressed - My current employer encourages people to “do their civic duty” and serve on juries - for that reason, not only do I get the court payment, but I retain my full salary for the days I’m on the jury.

When I was in my 20’s, I worked commissioned retail - and my employer at the time would only compensate me my very low “hourly” wage when serving jury duty - I presented that to the clerk of the court that serving would lead to financial hardship, and was excused from serving.

In most areas where there is a scheduled bus service, you can show the driver your jury summons and ride the bus for free to the courthouse.

Obviously that would not work in rural areas, but I suspect that is a rare occurrence, as people living in remote areas would have to have a way to get to town to buy supplies and the like.

When I was going to be out of state for work on the day I had been summoned to the court, I notified the court and got a re-scheduled date, so the courts are more than willing to work with you.

Much like the financial hardship situation above, the courts will work with you. My 87 year old father has hearing loss (not deaf but has trouble understanding conversations if they’re not loud enough, even with his hearing aids), and he went to the clerk of the court the last time he got a jury summons, and was permanently excused.

Jury Duty does not constitute involuntary servitude. Any person receiving a jury summons is notified of their rights, and what their options are. Likewise, most courts have a limitation on how frequently a person can serve on a jury (where I’m at in Texas it’s 3 years for State Courts and I believe the Federal Courts are the same, but they work from separate lists so serving a State Court Jury does not preclude you from getting Federal Court Summons).

Courts only resort to penalties on jurors for repeat offenses. Again, talk to the clerk of the court and they will work with you. The problem comes when a court doesn’t have enough potential jurors show up, and has to delay proceedings to send bailiffs out to track down jurors.

Every person is granted, by the 6th Amendment the right to fair and speedy trial, by a jury of their peers. If the jury pool is insufficient, the defendant and their council are denied that right. I have sat through Voir Dire (the actual jury selection process) and out of 50 in the pool watched as various people talk their way into or out of the jury of 12. The remaining people are then sent home, compensated for that day and know that they won’t get the summons again for 3 years. And nobody complains about doing it.

Jury duty is already “opt in” - it’s called registering to vote. If you don’t have an active voter registration, you’re not in the pool to be summonsed for jury duty. Some states also use driver’s license records, so again, no driver’s license no risk of a jury summons.

At the same time, reducing the potential jury pool through any other means would mean you’d get a much smaller pool made up of people who have nothing better to do, and thus not a valid cross-section of people making up the pool.

I agree there is a need for people to be educated on the jury system, and that education should start in school. At the same time Hollywood has time and again made TV and Movie juries entertaining, and many who experience the real thing become bored with a court of reality and not fiction.

In my County (and most Counties in Texas), jurors are paid $20 for the first day, and $60 for each additional day. That exceeds the local minimum wage of $7.25/hour for 8 hours. Likewise, most employers will compensate employees during their jury duty.

Federal Courts compensate jurors at $50 a day, but also will cover reasonable transportation (including parking) costs.

The courts are not made of money, and while the transit authority in large areas will let you ride free, and in my area they will buy you lunch each day you’re on the jury, I don’t see them expanding the compensation outside of that.

Some courts tried conducting trials via video remotely during the “social distancing” days of the pandemic, and it opens up a number of issues. Each juror is subject to external distractions and not giving the full attention to the case. At the same time the juror has access to Internet and other resources that allows them to do research information not a part of the case.

In addition, video conferencing opens the potential for juror names or other personally identifiable information to be revealed, which can lead to outsiders trying to intimidate the jurors.

Penalties are already “last resort”. Contact the court, they usually are more than willing to work with you to avoid a hardship.

Most courts already work without undue influence, but as we’ve seen, some areas have strong political leanings, and combined with a judge of the same political persuasion can lead to biased outcomes [Cough}New York v. Trump[Cough}

There needs to be a clear conflict of interest policy, where judges bow out of a case if it would affect the right to a fair trial, and a change of venue if the court cannot find an unbiased jury of peers.

Finally, keep in mind, a majority of jury trials are state level. While most states follow the Federal Courts, each state does have their own rules, and that may vary from state to state.

1 Like
4

That’s great that it’s not forced where you are, but in Utah and many other states, jury duty is absolutely mandatory under threat of fines, imprisonment, or other penalties. The fact that people have to plead their case to be excused proves it’s not voluntary. While some workplaces may offer full pay, that doesn’t do anything for people like me who work for myself. If I can’t do my work, even though it’s from home, it leaves me financially burdened. Just because it works for you doesn’t mean the system isn’t flawed for countless others.

I submitted multiple valid reasons to be excused, including needing to leave the country because my daughter’s husband killed himself, leaving her alone with 4 young children in a foreign country. I also made it clear that I’m extremely biased against the system, making me an unfit juror. None of that mattered. Utah’s courts don’t care what you’re going through—only that you comply. They even threatened jail time when I physically won’t be in the country. A civil rights attorney told me that Utah is the most aggressive and abusive state in the nation when it comes to forcing people into jury duty. Glad it worked out so perfectly for you, though. Must be nice.

1 Like
5

Again, my experience is with the State and County-level courts in both Kansas (where I grew up) and Texas (where I’ve lived for the last 21 years).

Yes, we have laws on the books that will declare someone in contempt if they flat out no-show, and yes, there are fines and possible jail time associated with it. But, if you can demonstrate to the court the potential hardship, you can and in most cases will be excused. Again, the use of fines and imprisonment is purely a last resort.

Every 18 year old male has to register with Selective Service, and remain eligible for the draft for 8 years, despite not having a draft in over 52 years. There is also a threat of incarceration or fines for failing to do so, along with denial of other benefits. Yes it’s forced, but, like jury duty, the idea of penalties is the same (in my research the last time anyone was charged with avoiding Selective Service registration was 1986, and only 14 were ever convicted, demonstrating how infrequent it is, despite millions failing to comply).

While true, in this “Gig” economy many more people are subject to financial hardships if they aren’t working (Thinking not only your of situation, but rideshare drivers, delivery drivers, and others that are paid “by the piece/job”), and maybe there’s room to accommodate those people that would suffer if they can’t perform their regular work. This would likely fall on the State/County/Local courts to adapt, as it is not Federal law (see the 10th Amendment).

The last two times I was called for jury duty, I was assigned to domestic violence cases. Due to a tragedy in my family (my cousin was shot by her estranged husband in front of their kids, and then he took his own life) that led to a family rift, I am unsuitable in those cases. I identified that for the court each time during voir dire and was not selected to be on the jury (and both times had it not been that point I was in the high probability of being on the jury). Neither time the court asked for proof, even though I know the year and the county it happened in that I could provide if the court asked. Appearing for voir dire both times met the requirements for jury duty and I didn’t have to serve again for at least 3 years (and at this point it’s been at least 5 years since I got a summons, albeit I’ve moved to a different county that’s more rural in that time, so I know I could get a jury summons at any time).

In the case of travel, when I requested an alternative date, I had to provide the court a copy of my travel itinerary as proof of my travel, and I was excused from the original date (and got a new jury summons a month or two later, that I was able to go for). This is understandable as the court likely gets many requests for accommodations when the person is using that as an excuse to avoid serving.

As I said previously, I’m not familiar with how it is done in Utah, I only know Kansas and Texas.

I know many states suffer from low response on jury summons, leaving the courts to do extraordinary measures to fill the pool of potential jurors. This is caused by a number of factors:

  • Fake jury summonses
  • Juror burnout
  • Lack of education about the jury system (and civics in general)
  • Lack of adequate care for family members
  • Potential financial hardships

The first can be addressed by the courts, imposing huge fines on those that mail those types of fake government notices (I haven’t seen fake summonses in a couple of years, but we’re getting a lot of fake “unpaid toll road fee” text messages as of late, again using the threat of fines an prison to gain account information).

In some areas certain people seem to get picked more often than others, leading them to being burned out. At 53 years old, I’ve only served twice on juries, but have been summoned 7 times (so an average of once every 5 years since my 18th birthday). I know others that get summonses every 3 years (as soon as they are eligible again), and that obviously puts more strain on that individual - especially if they get stuck serving each time.

Our education system has unfortunately dropped the ball on our youth, too many schools are teaching to the aptitude tests, and seem to have forgotten things like civics, the legal system and finances (I recently had a discussion on here with someone about compound interest, with them not understanding why the interest paid on a monthly mortgage payment is more than the principal - and heaven forbid if you ask them to write a check or create a budget). This problem has been going on for so long, that at least 2 and soon to be 3 generations will not have that knowledge.

The care of family members is not a problem the courts can fix - but the courts should be able to accommodate the situation in most cases. For example, if a potential juror is called in the summer, allow them to re-schedule to the fall when school is back in session.

And in the case of financial hardship, it should be reasonable for a “gig” economy worker to be excused if they can show the hardship caused by not working. While I agree the pay for jurors needs to increase, it will never reach the level of making anyone 100% whole.

Based on this discussion, this problem sounds like most of it should be more focused on and addressed in Salt Lake City and not in Washington D.C.

6

I appreciate your perspective, but I’ve already done my research and stand by my position that this policy needs to change. I’m not here to debate it, just to advocate for a solution that I believe is necessary. I won’t be continuing this discussion further. Best of luck to you.

7

That’s a terrible way to get anyone to support a proposal.