The participation of citizens in deciding controversies was so important to the formation of the United States, it is addressed four times in the Constitution. Article III, clause 3 (criminal juries), the Fifth Amendment (grand juries), the Sixth Amendment (impartial jury of the community), and the Seventh Amendment (civil juries). The lack of jury trials in the colonies is given as one reason for the Revolution in the Declaration of Independence.
The jury consists of laypersons, chosen randomly from the local population. These people get together to decide a specific trial. They are given significant powers. They hear evidence, both direct and circumstantial, deciding the facts of the case.
They deliberate in secret and announce their decision without giving reasons for it. After making their decision they go their separate ways. It is an institution that places citizens as the protectors of each other from the exercise of governmental power in depriving others of life, liberty or property. The right to a jury trial is a positive right, not a “negative liberty”.
Importance of Juries, Political Pressure on Judges
The Founding Fathers knew judicial selection would always be a political process. Regardless of how judges are selected, whether executive appointment, merit selection or popular election, a judge always has a history that placed him or her on the bench. In some systems, elections are used to determine if an individual remains a judge.
These days there are people interested in specific issues that monitor judicial performance. This monitoring can have an impact on the thought process of even the most impartial judge. There are groups monitoring judicial decisions about hate crimes, domestic violence, DUI prosecutions, allegations of child abuse and more. In close cases, factors outside the courtroom may have an impact on judicial decision making.
Jury Selection: The Impartial Jury in a Trial Setting
Juries are selected through a process known as voir dire. During that process, a large pool of potential jurors is brought into a court room. They are advised of some basic facts of the controversy they are to decide. They are asked questions about their background and potential prejudices.
Lawyers for each side then may ask the judge to remove a juror because of a demonstrated prejudice. This is striking a juror for cause. Depending upon the case, each side has a specific number of challenges, to have a juror removed from consideration without a reason. These are preemptory challenges.
Juries can vary in number depending upon the case. After challenges for cause are resolved and each side has used its preemptory challenges as it sees fit, and the number of jurors has reached the legally defined number for the case, the selection process is complete.
While each side looks for jurors that are sympathetic, the give and take of the selection process is designed to arrive at a group that is impartial as a whole. The secrecy of the deliberations and the fact that the jury need not justify its decision are designed to insulate juries from political pressures.
The Right to a Jury in a Criminal Setting
The government exercises no greater power than when it seeks to take away someone’s freedom. When someone is accused of a crime, the possible penalties include the loss of liberty and in some instances the loss of life. The Constitution places citizen jurors between the government and the exercise of this power over other individuals of society.
The Supreme Court has determined that if a crime has a potential penalty of more than six months in jail, the accused has a right to a jury trial. A simple charge of driving on a suspended license carries a possible year in jail. That person can have a jury decide if he is guilty or not guilty.
The right to a jury for a criminal defendant is so important that he cannot give up that right to plead guilty without doing so publicly and in open court. The judge must inquire if the defendant understands what a jury is and what it does and if the defendant fully understands that he is giving up that right by pleading guilty.
Constitutional Liberties are Positive Rights
The Constitution provides for protection for United States citizens from the exercise of government authority. It is critical that the courts are bound by the essential constraints placed upon them by the Founding Fathers. The right to a jury trial is a positive right, and the notion that somehow a constraint placed upon the exercise of government authority is a “negative liberty” is at odds with American principles.
 |
