Disability and age protections for juries

Summary#

The Disability and Age in Jury Service Nondiscrimination Act is an introduced bill that would amend title 28 of the U.S. Code, including the rules for federal juries. Its stated goal is to prohibit excluding people from federal jury service because of disability or age. It is not law, and passage is uncertain.

  • It would add disability and age to the grounds on which people may not be excluded from federal jury service.
  • It would replace “infirmity” as a qualification rule with “disability that cannot be reasonably accommodated.”
  • It would bar disqualifying a person under two existing jury-qualification paragraphs because of disability if reasonable accommodation would make that person qualified.
  • The bill does not create a new office or program, or set out an application or appeals process.

What it means for you#

  • People with disabilities: A disability would not, by itself, be enough to disqualify you if reasonable accommodation would make you qualified under the relevant rules. The bill does not say what accommodations must be provided or how to request them.
  • Older people: Age would be added to the grounds protected from exclusion. The bill does not change any age-related qualification rules in the text it amends.
  • People called for federal jury service: These changes concern federal juries, not state or local juries.
  • Potential jurors generally: The bill does not change other eligibility rules or guarantee that a person will be selected to serve.

Money#

No cost information is in the available material.

  • The bill does not state an amount for federal spending, staffing, accommodation costs, or enforcement.
  • Providing accommodations could involve costs, but the bill gives no estimate or funding instructions.

What is unclear#

  • “Reasonable accommodation” is not defined in the bill.
  • The bill does not explain how a person would request an accommodation, who would decide, or what review or appeal would be available.
  • The two qualification paragraphs referenced in the bill are not included in the supplied material. The parent law was not supplied, so I could not verify how these changes compare with current law or how they interact with those qualifications.
  • The bill does not explain how adding age to the nondiscrimination rule would interact with any existing age-related qualifications.
  • The bill sets no start date or implementation details.

Case for#

  • A possible argument for the bill is that disability or age alone should not keep someone from federal jury service.
  • Requiring consideration of reasonable accommodation could allow a person to serve when an adjustment would make them qualified, rather than treating disability as an automatic barrier.
  • Adding age to the nondiscrimination rule could make clear that age alone is not a reason to exclude someone, subject to other qualification rules.

Case against#

  • The bill does not define reasonable accommodation or set out how decisions would be made, which could leave important questions to implementation.
  • The cost and practical demands of providing accommodations are not estimated or addressed.
  • Because the bill refers to existing qualification rules without reproducing them, the full effect of the changes—and how they fit with those rules—is not clear from the supplied material.