While Judiciary Grapples With Resumption of Jury Trials, State Bar Raises Constitutional Questions
The state bar report expresses a wary view of any expanded use of technology in jury trials, and expresses concerns that unequal access to technology in society could lead to jury pools that are less representative of the population.
July 07, 2020 at 05:26 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on New Jersey Law Journal
While the state judiciary considers how to restart jury trials amid the COVID-19 pandemic, the New Jersey State Bar Association has declared that certain potential changes should be off-limits.
Virtual jury trials are unconstitutional, the bar association's Committee on the Resumption of Jury Trials said in a report made public late Monday.
The association said it would support conducting preliminary aspects of jury selection remotely, but final voir dire should continue to be conducted face to face in the courthouse. And the association also said it opposes any reduction in peremptory challenges, even if cutting such challenges would allow jury selection to proceed with a smaller pools of potential jurors.
"A live, in-person jury is the cornerstone of our civil and criminal justice system. As such, we do not believe that virtual jury trials will satisfy constitutional mandates," said the committee, which is part of the bar's Pandemic Task Force.
It's unknown if the ideas panned by the bar association are actively being considered. Although the judiciary has revealed little about when or how it might begin holding new jury trials, a court committee is studying how such trials can safely resume. Representatives from the state bar association and other groups are participating in that committee.
The state bar report expresses a wary view of expanded use of technology in jury trials, and expresses concerns that unequal access to technology in society could lead to jury pools that are less representative of the population.
"At this time of social justice protest and reform, we are particularly cognizant of the need for a plan that produces a jury pool reflective of the diversity of the community. As such, we believe that to the extent that evolving communication technology is part of this plan and future plans, sufficient safeguards must be built in to ensure that any required technology is available to all potential jurors. To do otherwise would be to create a system that discriminates based on the ability to afford the technology necessary to meaningfully participate in the jury process," the state bar report states.
Reducing peremptory challenges would permit reducing the number of jurors required in the selection process, but the report says peremptory challenges should not be reduced.
"We must not yield the very real protections against juror bias provided by the statutorily afforded peremptory challenges, especially when we explore mechanisms to implement technology and other remote screening criteria. In a time when systemic racism and implicit bias are at the forefront of American social issues, the peremptory challenge is an important right afforded to litigants which makes them feel as though they have 'a say' in the jury that is being selected," the report said.
New Jersey's judiciary has already seen resistance in trying to use technology to resume court proceedings halted by the pandemic. The court's efforts to institute virtual grand juries, with jurors participating on a computer from home, has seen widespread resistance from lawyers.
The state bar's report suggested that a video introduction to the court system, availability screening of jurors and preliminary screening of jurors could take place outside the courthouse. Final voir dire of jurors, however, should be conducted in larger courtrooms, with no more than 30 prequalified potential jurors appearing each day, the report proposes.
A judiciary spokesman, Peter McAleer, did not comment on specific points in the State Bar Association report, but noted the judiciary committee's work on the subject of resuming trials.
"The court's post-pandemic response committee, which includes representation from the Bar Association, has been hard at work discussing plans to address the myriad issues involved with the safe return to jury trials. We welcome the Bar Association's recommendations as the court finalizes its plan to recommence jury trials," McAleer said.
William Mergner Jr., the chairman of the committee that issued the bar report, did not return a call requesting comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSteptoe Offers Associates New Flexible Billable Hour Tracks in Revamped Comp System
4 minute readNevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
5 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250