The Diminishing Role of Trial by Jury in the U.S.

In the United States, the tradition of trial by jury, once a cornerstone of the legal system, has significantly declined. Today, juries decide a fraction of both criminal and civil cases compared to the past, while other countries see their jury systems expanding. What factors contributed to this shift, and is the decline of juries necessarily a negative development?

The Historical Significance of Trial by Jury

From ancient societies to England, the concept of citizens resolving disputes has deep roots. Trial by jury emerged as a fundamental aspect of the English legal system, designed to:

• Limit governmental power.
• Engage citizens in crucial decision-making.

Juries determined whether defendants faced trial, assessed guilt, and resolved financial disagreements. This tradition crossed the Atlantic, becoming embedded in the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution mandated grand juries for criminal case reviews, jury trials for nearly all crimes, and provisions for juries in civil disputes.

The Decline of the Jury System in America

Despite its historical importance, the jury's role has diminished. Grand juries are less common, and juries now decide:

• Less than 4% of criminal cases.
• Less than 1% of civil cases.

This decline is partly attributed to Supreme Court interpretations of the Constitution, leading to practices that circumvent the jury system.

Plea Bargaining

Plea bargaining is a significant factor. Prosecutors offer defendants a choice: plead guilty for a reduced sentence or risk a potentially harsher penalty if convicted by a jury. The threat of a severe sentence can pressure even innocent individuals to accept a plea. Consequently, guilty pleas have surged from approximately 20% in the 19th century to around 90% in the 21st century.

Summary Judgement

Summary judgment allows judges to dismiss civil trials if the plaintiff lacks sufficient evidence. While intended for cases lacking reasonable disagreement, its application has broadened, with some arguing it's now overused. For example, judges often grant employers' requests to dismiss employment discrimination cases.

Arbitration

Arbitration offers an alternative dispute resolution method where parties forgo court trials, relying instead on professional arbitrators (lawyers, professors, or former judges). While arbitration can be a strategic choice, it's often unknowingly agreed to in contracts like employment applications and consumer agreements. This can be problematic, as arbitrators might favor companies that frequently hire them.

Is the Disappearance of Juries a Positive Trend?

Juries have drawbacks:

• They can be expensive.
• They are time-intensive.
• They are prone to errors.
• They are sometimes unnecessary, especially when parties agree to settlements.

However, juries also offer unique advantages. Properly selected juries are more representative of the population and lack the biases of prosecutors, legislators, or judges seeking reelection or promotions. The U.S. founders believed in the wisdom of impartial citizens to oversee the government's branches. Jury trials empower ordinary citizens to play a vital role in maintaining the social order.

The Future of the Jury System

The survival of the jury system in the U.S. remains uncertain. While efficiency and alternative dispute resolutions have gained prominence, the value of citizen participation and checks on governmental power through jury trials should not be overlooked. The balance between these competing interests will determine the jury's role in the future of American justice.