A lot of people view it with the opposite effect: you’re being judged by a set of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty.

I have been called to jury duty 3 times in my life and never been selected as a juror. I consider it an important part of citizenship and community engagement.

> A lot of people view it with the opposite effect: you’re being judged by a set of people not smart enough to get out of jury duty.

Having only recently served on a jury, I realize now that most people who hold this opinion probably have never been on a jury. I was never so cynical, but serving on a jury still raised my confidence in and respect for my fellow citizens.

That said, my case was a relatively minor misdemeanor battery case and it become apparent to me that the right to a jury trial for such misdemeanors is a ridiculous waste of resources. It incentivizes piling on felony charges, or conversely failing to prosecute misdemeanor cases at all if the defendant pushes back. Some of the pathologies in our criminal justice system are much easier to understand and appreciate in light of how extensive is the right to a jury trial in practice. (All 12 of us on the jury agreed that the only reason the case was even being prosecuted despite the rigmarole of a jury trial was for political reasons, though we deliberated seriously nonetheless. It took us 2 days to agree to acquit, but I don't think anyone would have considered it unjust if it had been a bench trial and the judge convicted.)

I had always dismissed criticisms of jury trials as unpersuasive, especially in the American context where we're so concerned with the risk of government oppression. But I always implicitly assumed that the right didn't apply to minor misdemeanors. Turns out that even though under Common Law and under U.S. Supreme Court precedent the right isn't provided for minor misdemeanors (definition varies but still includes risk of jail time), in practice most states guarantee a jury trial for all misdemeanors. Reasons vary--19th century constitutional reform, seemingly simple 20th century statutory changes, creeping judicial minimization of the definitions of "minor" or "petty"--but the end result has been the same. Though, reverting this would be easier in some states than others.

Your jury decided that the prosecution was because of politics, that you'd agree that the defendant was guilty, and voted to acquit, anyway?

It sounds like you learned a lot of the arguments that our founding fathers had for why the right to jury trial is so important.

Our decision ultimately came down to the facts, not the politics. The choice by the D.A. to take this particular case to trial seemed clearly politically motivated, but our only concern (as far as I could tell) was balancing justice for the defendant and the victim as it related to the incident.

Ah, yes, jury nullification.

Knowing about it is your civic duty, but if you let on that you've heard of it, they'll kick you off the jury

Fun fact: if you don’t register to vote you’ll very likely never be called, ever. Most cities/states use voter rolls for prospective jurors.

I once got as close as the first alternate before I was bounced by one of the lawyers as a “free kick” - can’t even remember if it was defense or not.