Skip to main content

Improving Juror Response Rates- By Carrot or Stick

By

Have you been called to serve jury duty lately? Did you heed your summons and perform your civil duty? In many areas, if your jury summons got lost in the mail, was eaten by the dog, or simply forgotten, there’s a good chance no consequence will come from your lapse. In some Texas counties, however, this is changing. This week, Texas Lawyer reported that Dallas County is changing its tune when it comes to no-show jurors. Dallas County began a Jury Services Court pilot program in response to jury turnout rates as low as 20%. Jurors who don’t respond to their jury summons may be sent a notice summoning them to Jury Services Court, which is presided over by Judge Gena Slaughter of the 191st District Court. Once they appear, the jurors may explain their absence, and reschedule their date for jury service. If jurors do not appear on the rescheduled date, a show cause contempt order is issued, and if not responded to, a warrant may be issued for their arrest and fines may be imposed. Texas Government Code § 62.0141 governs the penalty for failure to answer a jury summons, which punishes both non-compliance with a summons or the provision of false information to be excused from jury service with fines up to $1,000. 

The Dallas County program is modeled after El Paso County’s Jury Duty Court that began operations in 2005. During the 2010 fiscal year, the El Paso County District Clerk collected more than $300,000 in jury contempt fees and fines, largely due to professionals like doctors and lawyers who choose to pay the maximum fine to avoid jury duty, according to a Dallas Morning News report. The El Paso program has led to a jury yield of 80%, according to Dallas County Jury Services Manager, M. Anne Brabham.

Despite these enforcement mechanisms, a primary reason that potential jurors do not respond to summonses is the financial sacrifice jury service can entail. Texas law does not require employers to pay employees taking off work to perform jury duty, and a study in 2000 provided evidence that poor compensation is a significant factor in non-participation in jury service (See, Ted M. Eades, Revisiting the Jury System in Texas: A Study of the Jury Pool in Dallas County, 54 SMU L. Rev. 1813, 1826 (2001)). The study found that financial reasons for non-participation had a disparate impact on racial minorities, especially Hispanic Americans. Though some counties, like Dallas, have raised jury pay to $40 per day, most Texas counties have not.
The effect of non-participation can have more than personal consequences; in the aggregate it contributes to the erosion of one of our most valuable freedoms as citizens. The Sixth Amendment requires jury venires to reflect representative cross sections of the community and a 20% participation rate is unlikely to provide such representation. Continued low public participation rates may lead to constitutional challenges, even without evidence of intentional discrimination.  As Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers, the right to a jury trial is a “valuable safeguard to liberty,” and essential to a free and democratic society. Whether jury participation is increased by stronger enforcement mechanisms, increased compensation, or more efforts to educate about the importance of juries, it is essential that Texas courts continue to work towards improving participation rates.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Amazing, but True, Deportation Story of Carlos Marcello

By
Earlier this week, the University of Houston Law Center was fortunate to have as its guest Professor Daniel Kanstroom of Boston College of Law. An expert in immigration law, he is the Director of the International Human Rights Program, and he both founded and directs the Boston College Immigration and Asylum Clinic. Speaking as the guest of the Houston Journal of International Law’s annual Fall Lecture Series, Professor Kanstroom discussed issues raised in his new book, Aftermath: Deportation Law and the New American Diaspora . Professor Michael Olivas introduced Professor Kanstroom to the audience, and mentioned the fascinating tale of Carlos Marcello, which Professor Kanstroom wrote about in his chapter “The Long, Complex, and Futile Deportation Saga of Carlos Marcello,” in Immigration Stories , a collection of narratives about leading immigration law cases. My interest piqued, I read and was amazed by Kanstroom’s description of one of the most interesting figures in American le...
1 comment
Read more

Lessons for Today from the Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda

By Anonymous
“Man’s inhumanity to man is not only perpetrated by the vitriolic actions of those who are bad. It is also perpetrated by the vitiating inaction of those who are good.” –Martin Luther King Jr.   Last week, I had the pleasure of attending  Professor Zachary D. Kaufman ’s presentation on  Lessons for Today from the Genocide Against the Tutsi in Rwanda  hosted by the  Johannesburg Holocaust & Geno cide Ce ntre . Among the many takeaways highlighted by Professor Kaufman and drawn from  Lessons from Rwanda: Post-Genocide Law and Policy   were ten simple yet profound lessons:   Lesson #1: Hate speech is dangerous.   To illustrate the role that hate speech played in the Rwandan genocide, Professor Kaufman discussed multiple forms of  propaganda , such as Kangura, Radio Rwanda, and RTLM “hate radio.”   He concludes that we must have limits, including with respect to social media, and further asserts that social media must do a better jo...
Post a Comment
Read more

Texas Subsequent History Table Ceases Publication

By
This week, Thomson Reuters notified subscribers that publication of the Texas Subsequent History Table will be discontinued and no further updates will be produced, due to “insufficient market interest.” Practitioners have been extracting writ (and since 1997, petition) history from the tables since their initial publication in 1917 as The Complete Texas Writs of Error Table . The tables, later published by West, have been used for nearly a century to determine how the Texas Supreme Court or Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of an appeal from an intermediate appellate court. The purpose of adding this notation to citations is to indicate the effect of the Texas Supreme Court’s action on the weight of authority of the Court of Appeals’ opinion.  For example, practitioners may prefer to use as authority a case that the Texas Supreme Court has determined is correct both in result and legal principles applied (petition refused), rather than one that simply presents no error that requ...
Post a Comment
Read more