3 ms·

Years of someone's life versus government operating expenses? Have you spent much time on jury duty? Hanging out in a room full of prospective jurors, some of

Years of someone's life versus government operating expenses? Have you spent much time on jury duty? Hanging out in a room full of prospective jurors, some of whom are literally praying for the day's cases to get settled before they're compelled to spend days or even weeks in court, gives one a real gut-level appreciation for the court system's love of settlements. It's not just a matter of paying more taxes, because the costs of a jury trial can't all be settled with cash. Jurors get paid a stipend in my state, but it's $50 per day, which wouldn't fully compensate a minimum-wage worker, let alone a doctor, a lawyer, or a consultant. Companies must pay their salaried workers for up to three days of jury service, but lots of people don't have salaries (see above under "consultants"), and backlogs and inboxes accumulate whether you're on the job or not. And, even if it were a good idea, dialing back the right to trial-by-jury in the USA would be the opposite of a "straightforward" reform, because that right is in the Constitution.

mindslight 12y ago
You're either in MA, or that "compensation" schedule is popular. I agree with your description of jury duty, and it has major problems as well. But I disagree with this statement: > because the costs of a jury trial can't all be settled with cash. Increase the stipend to be in line with a person's salary, or their education level if they're self-employed. Yes, this is going to be expensive. But just like government efficiency is not a justification to destroy rights, it's also not a justification to demand people's uncompensated labor. And once jurors were properly compensated, I bet it would be much easier to cancel if one really had a problem with losing the time. (Also, if the issue is only with the cost of jury trials, then I can weaken my argument to say that plea-bargains should turn into judge-bargains, where forgoing the jury will limit your punishment to the smaller amount) > the right to trial-by-jury ... is in the Constitution Yes, and my whole point is that plea bargaining has also undermined that right, only by a slow erosion over time rather than by an overt policy choice. To the extent that people would presently balk at eliminating juries for efficiency, they should also take issue with defendants effectively being denied a trial under threat of overblown punishment.
- dllthomas 12y ago
  "Increase the stipend to be in line with a person's salary, or their education level if they're self-employed." Maybe you could base it on their taxes. That should work regardless of their source of income, though of course we're assuming that income is the only thing being displaced worthy of compensation.

mindslight 12y ago

You're either in MA, or that "compensation" schedule is popular. I agree with your description of jury duty, and it has major problems as well. But I disagree with this statement: > because the costs of a jury trial can't all be settled with cash. Increase the stipend to be in line with a person's salary, or their education level if they're self-employed. Yes, this is going to be expensive. But just like government efficiency is not a justification to destroy rights, it's also not a justification to demand people's uncompensated labor. And once jurors were properly compensated, I bet it would be much easier to cancel if one really had a problem with losing the time. (Also, if the issue is only with the cost of jury trials, then I can weaken my argument to say that plea-bargains should turn into judge-bargains, where forgoing the jury will limit your punishment to the smaller amount) > the right to trial-by-jury ... is in the Constitution Yes, and my whole point is that plea bargaining has also undermined that right, only by a slow erosion over time rather than by an overt policy choice. To the extent that people would presently balk at eliminating juries for efficiency, they should also take issue with defendants effectively being denied a trial under threat of overblown punishment.

dllthomas 12y ago
"Increase the stipend to be in line with a person's salary, or their education level if they're self-employed." Maybe you could base it on their taxes. That should work regardless of their source of income, though of course we're assuming that income is the only thing being displaced worthy of compensation.