> In fact jury selection is notorious for discarding potential jurors with intelligence, critical thinking, legal awareness, or domain expertise. Jurors reflect the part of society least qualified to be making these decisions.

Jurors get dismissed based on whether or not one side feels they decide in their favor or not. That's it.

So whoever thinks their case is weakest when viewed intelligently (i.e. ability to handle subtletly, nuance, complexity, rational over emotion, science, statistics) is going to need to get those intelligent people off the jury.

When there's no agreement I suspect the less educated are favored though.

I'd believe a juror getting dismissed for knowing statistics and being persuadable by logical arguments, before I'd believe a juror being dismissed for being in a demographic who favors police and emotional arguments.

Depends on which side is moving to dismiss that particular juror and what finding in their favor would require.

Just mentioning FIJA can be enough to land you in jail.

That's not true. Jury nullification is legal (both talking about it and carrying it out), even if some judges and prosecutors wish it otherwise.

I can't find any supporting documentation-- so take this as hearsay-- but I recall a man being arrested for handing out FIJA pamphlets in front of a courthouse at the Southwestern Justice Center in Riverside, CA.