The umpires strike back: Can jurors revive respect for the rule of law?

As this is being written, the popular press is abuzz with stories of an impending "Constitutional Crisis" as the executive branch of the federal government is perceived to be engaged in a game of "chicken" with the judicial branch over a host of issues. I am also in the midst of a four-week jury trial in which 15 members of the community are diligently at work - without drama - playing their critical part in the administration of justice. The contrast is palpable, and a cause for optimism.

Oh, and today is Law Day, which, according to the legislation establishing it "a special day of celebration by the people of the United States... for the cultivation of the respect for law that is so vital to the democratic way of life." (36 U.S.C. § 113). This year's Law Day theme is "E Pluribus Unum" or "Out of Many, One."   The American Bar Association, which selects the Law Day theme each year, describes its choice as follows: "[T]he 2025 Law Day theme urges us to take pride in a Constitution that bridges our differences to bring us together as a united nation. Our civic lives tie us together as one."

This aspirational invitation to celebrate our Constitution comes at a critical time. A Gallup Poll Report published late last year reported that confidence in the American judicial system and courts dropped to a record low 35% in 2024. (See "Americans Pass Judgment on Their Courts: Sharp Decline in Confidence in Judiciary is Among the Largest Gallup has Ever Measured," ( Dec. 17, 2024)). )

To put that statistic in context, we now trail all other affluent countries (i.e., all nations in the OECD) on this metric. Moreover, our only solace for the 24% decline in public confidence in our courts between 2020 and 2024 is that this shocking drop was not as bad as what Gallup observed in Myanmar (when military rule returned); in Venezuela (when its shattered economy led to political turmoil); and in Syria (just prior to its civil war). Not exactly comforting comparisons.

For those of us with a direct stake in our justice system, who presumably hold a more favorable impression of that system, Law Day presents an urgent reason and timely opportunity to work at moving general public sentiment in a more positive direction. Thus, as I reflected on the "Out of Many, One" theme in the context of the current challenges facing our justice system, it occurred to me that it is an apt description of how one part of our system operates, which is one that the public still seems to respect. That is the trial by jury.

Consider it this way. On the first day of trial, 40-50 people randomly selected from the community show up at a courtroom as potential jurors. There is no homogeneity of age, race, gender, economic status, education, faith or any other characteristic. This diverse group is then screened to eliminate jurors who cannot be objective and fair. Once selected, this distilled (but still diverse) group collectively swears to follow the law given by the judge and to judge the evidence fairly. The jurors are also admonished against getting information from any source other than what is introduced in the trial. They hear evidence, curated by the judge for reliability and relevance, and then, after being instructed on the law, they are sent to deliberate. But, before they do, the judge gives them some closing admonitions: 

"The presiding juror should see to it that your discussions are orderly and that everyone has a fair chance to be heard. It is your duty to talk with one another in the jury room and to consider the views of all the jurors. Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after you have considered the evidence with the other members of the jury. Feel free to change your mind if you are convinced that your position should be different. You should all try to agree. But do not give up your honest beliefs just because others think differently.

Please do not state your opinions too strongly at the beginning of your deliberations or immediately announce how you plan to vote as it may interfere with an open discussion. Keep an open mind so that you and your fellow jurors can easily share ideas about the case." (CACI 5009.)

The end-product of this process of orderly, open discussion, where a diverse group of individuals has been encouraged to express their individual views, but also to respect and listen to the views of others (and where everyone has been told that it is ok to change your mind!) is a verdict. Whether unanimous or the supermajority required in civil case, the diverse jury members speak through one verdict.

Thus, "Out of Many, One," is a fair depiction of what happens in a jury trial.

Despite the political, cultural and social conflicts in our country and the decline in trust in some of our legal institutions, we by and large regard the jury trial as admirable. We routinely characterize the jury trial as the "genius" of the American system of justice and the general population has greater trust in jurors than in other participants in the justice system, including lawyers and judges ("Ipsos Survey: Jury Service and the Legal System | Ipsos," (August 2023). Also, people who have served on juries have a much higher level of trust in the justice system and the participants in it. For example, the Ipsos survey just cited reported that 74% of those with jury experience have either a "fair amount" or "great amount" of trust in state court judges. Only 46 % of the general public reported that level of trust. In short, people who participate as jurors and have first-hand experience with the justice system tend to trust it more.

So, my Law Day message is this. Let's celebrate our jurors. And, try to serve on a jury yourself and/or encourage people you know to do the same! Perhaps we can rebuild trust in our system of justice one venire at a time. And wouldn't it be marvelous if we can find ways to export some of the modes of dialog and deliberation that are commonplace in the jury room, to the public square.

Out of Many, One.