Press & News

Gerald Skoning Published in The National Law Journal
04/24/2006

The April 24, 2006 issue of the NLJ carries an article ("Adopt Uniform Standards") by Gerald writes that "Jury selection is a crucially important part of every criminal and civil trial in this country. Judges use the selection process to find a panel of jurors who will fairly and honestly try the case, and trial lawyers look for fair-minded jurors who might be just a little more fair to their clients.

But, as important as the process of jury selection is, there is no uniform system for it in our federal courts. Currently, federal district judges have broad discretion in devising their own personal systems for selecting jurors. As a result, there are virtually as many different ways of selecting jurors in our federal judicial system as there are federal trial judges. With 678 federal district judges nationwide, that makes for a lot of variety in the manner jurors are chosen for trials.

Formulating a set of uniform jury-selection standards that could be utilized by our federal courts would be beneficial to the judiciary and trial lawyers alike. Such standards would be a useful guide for trial judges in the jury-selection process and give trial lawyers a better understanding of their role in the selection process from courtroom to courtroom.

No doubt, some judges will view this proposal as yet another unnecessary incursion on the exercise of their discretion in managing the trial of a case. But certainly the concept of uniform rules is nothing new. Judges regularly follow uniform local procedural rules, give model jury instructions and, like it or not, are required to consult the uniform sentencing guidelines.

In short, federal judges already are governed by uniform rules and procedures, so they shouldn't object to following standardized procedures for the selection of those juries of 12 "tried and true." For the most part, the patchwork quilt of diverse jury selection systems used by our federal judges have worked and worked well over the years, but, adding an element of consistency or even uniformity to the process, would enhance fair play and due process in our judicial system.