Ken Connor, Center for a Just Society, June 2005 - Right to Trial by Jury

"[T]here is a widespread effort underway to take away our right to a trial by jury. Those pushing this wrong-headed agenda claim that it will reduce the costs of healthcare and eliminate 'frivolous lawsuits.' But what they are really saying is, 'We don't trust our fellow citizens to resolve disputes. Lobbyists and politicians know better.'"

Our Founding Fathers recognized that the collective judgment of ordinary people, while not perfect, is the most reliable means devised by man of resolving conflicts in America's courtrooms. Here are some of the advantages of the jury system:

• 
  A jury is made up of local citizens, men and women from the community who are in the best position to evaluate how the conduct at issue compares with the standards of the community in which they live.

• The composition of the jury is not known in advance of the trial, thus reducing the likelihood of undue influence being exerted on the jurors from either side.

• Jurors cannot be paid by either side. They can only consider evidence that meets a certain threshold of reliability and can only consider testimony given under oath. They cannot be approached by one party outside the presence of the other party. (Compare this with the legislative process, where access to the decision maker often depends on contributions having been made by an interested party; testimony is frequently not given under oath; no reliability threshold for evidence is required; and interested parties usually lobby the decision maker outside the presence of the other interested parties).

• Jurors commonly complete their service in just a few days or weeks and then return to their private lives. Judges are often on the bench for many years, and in some cases for life, leaving them vulnerable to ongoing efforts to influence their decisions.

• It may be easy to find one errant adjudicator who is out of touch with their community (such as a judge). It's much harder to find 12 ordinary citizens who will come to an outrageous result, and even if they do, there are mechanisms in place to correct such a result.