Summoned: Making the Case for Jury Service

Reference Staff
walawlibrary
Published in
4 min readFeb 26, 2024

--

A brightly colored illustration shows a courtroom. Tables for counsel are in the left of the frame, with two people sitting at them. An attorney in the middle of the illustration faces away and stands directly in front of the jury, each of whom is looking at the attorney and listening. A judge holding a gavel in their left hand is on the bench at right. A court reporter sits to the left of the judge’s bench. A window at right is shown with sunlight forming shadows on the wall behind the jurors.
Image designed by Wannapik

A library staff member was recently summoned for jury duty. So we thought we would turn it over to her to blog on her experience and some of the issues surrounding jury duty in Washington. Following is her reporting.

The postcard arrived in my mailbox last month: “You’ve been summoned.” It was the first time in almost ten years of living here in Washington that I had been given the call to appear at my county courthouse for jury duty. I had to visit the jury service website, check to make sure my contact information was up to date, and print out my jury service badge to take with me if my number was called. I had options for reporting COVID status and an easy process for requesting a deferral. Then, the weekend before my summons went into effect, I had to call the jury service number to find out if my assigned group had been pulled to appear for an upcoming trial.

I was very excited to appear for jury duty and not because I love to binge true crime series on Netflix. I have always enjoyed doing my civic duty. However, the most frequent reaction I got when I told people I had been summoned was, “Ugh. You should try to get out of it.”

I get it. Jury duty can be a lot of sitting around, only to find out you didn’t get picked to be in the final panel that makes the decision at trial. It can be tough to find childcare or parking. It may be prohibitively expensive to miss work or you may believe that a previous criminal conviction prevents you from serving. People have deadlines and chores and other things on their plates. While responding to the summons is required by law, substantial barriers exist that may be hard to overcome.

A photo shows a jury box in an empty courtroom. Fourteen wooden chairs are lined up in two rows. Shuttered windows are shown to the right behind the jury box and a door is shown to the back left. A wooden banister partially surrounds the jury box.
Photo by Patrick Feller / CC BY 2.0 DEED

In the past five years or so, many studies have been conducted on the benefits of having a diverse jury pool, and the problems caused by a lack of racial, gender, and socioeconomic diversity in the jury box. The US Constitution guarantees trials by an impartial jury. According to research by the National Center for State Courts, “it is critical to have an inclusive and representative jury to preserve the right to a fair and impartial jury.” The Washington Appellate Project also noted that “studies show that racially diverse juries spend more time deliberating, make fewer errors, and result in fairer trials than non-diverse juries.” The US Supreme Court opined about the lack of jury diversity as early as 1940 in Smith v. Texas. And yet, lack of jury diversity remains a persistent problem to this day.

States are answering the call for change, however. The State Supreme Court and the Minority and Justice Commission addressed the issue of jury diversity in 2017 and state efforts to improve the system during their annual symposium. (The video of the testimony can be viewed here.) The Minority and Justice Commission also convened a Jury Diversity Task Force to explore ways to combat the lack of diversity in state and local courthouses. In 2018 the Supreme Court adopted a court rule that “made it easier for opposing lawyers to challenge a peremptory strike without having to prove intentional discrimination.” The rule, GR 37, was the first of its kind in the country.

A screenshot of the GR 9 cover sheet for the proposed new court rule GR 37 is shown in black text. It is titled, “GR 9 Cover Sheet.” Only part of the cover sheet is shown. It is divided into sections labeled, “A. Name of Proponent,” “B. Spokesperson,” and “C. Purpose.”
The ACLU of Washington proposed what would become GR 37, a new court rule “meant to protect Washington jury trials from intentional or unintentional, unconscious, or institutional bias in the empanelment of juries.” The rule number was changed from GR 36 to GR 37 during the adoption process.

Other states have also responded to the challenge. California followed Washington by codifying much of GR 37 into their laws. California also introduced legislation in 2023 to raise the daily juror pay from $15 to $100. Arizona eliminated peremptory challenges, and states such as New Jersey and Connecticut have also explored the issue. The data has already shown that increasing juror pay in San Francisco contributed to an increase in racial and economic diversity on juries.

As for me, my jury group did not end up getting called in after all. This means that I will have to wait for several months before my name can be drawn again. I look forward to finding the next postcard in my box and (hopefully) getting the chance to finally serve on a jury.

Need more information?

The Washington Courts website has prepared a comprehensive list of questions about jury duty, including information about how jurors are chosen, eligibility, disability accommodations, and child care. For questions about serving on a jury in your own area, be sure to visit your local court’s website for more information. (LE)

--

--