Civil Jury Project

Volume: 11| Issue 3

Fall 2026

Opening Statement

I have good news and bad news. The bad news is that we received very few responses to our survey of Judicial Advisors. We wanted to know whether political beliefs were becoming more influential in jury selection, deliberations and verdicts.


The good news—perhaps—is that we have received little evidence of such an influence. Whether that reflects the absence of a problem or simply the limitations of our survey remains an open question.


We begin this issue with an overview of what has been happening with jury trials, both civil and criminal, since we raised the issue of politics and jury trials in our Winter 2026 newsletter.


We next turn to Training the Next Generation and finish with a book and a documentary about our jury system, both coincidentally scheduled for release on November 15.


As always, if your court or bar association is interested in a presentation on jury trials, the Civil Jury Project or jury improvement tools please call me at (217) 430-7459 or contact me at markd56.md@gmail.com.


If you have a jury trial topic that you would like to write about, please reach out to me at markd56.md@gmail.com.


Sincerely,

Hon. Mark A. Drummond (ret.),
Executive/Judicial Director

Upcoming Events

New York State Bar Association Trial Academy in Collaboration with NITA, Albany, NY

October 14-17, 2026


Click here for details.


Juries: Grand, Criminal and Civil


By Hon. Mark A. Drummond (ret.)

Executive/Judicial Director of the Civil Jury Project


Our civilisation has decided, and very justly decided, that determining the guilt or innocence of men is a thing too important to be trusted to trained men. It wishes for light upon that awful matter, it asks men who know no more law than I know, but who can feel the things that I felt in the jury box. When it wants a library catalogued, or the solar system discovered, or any trifle of that kind it uses up its specialists. But when it wishes anything done which is really serious, it collects twelve of the ordinary men standing round. The same thing was done, if I remember right, by the Founder of Christianity.

G.K. Chesterton, The Twelve Men, Tremendous Trifles (1909)



Although the Civil Jury Project focuses on civil jury trials, public confidence in the civil jury system cannot be separated entirely from confidence in criminal juries and grand juries. In my presentations to civic groups, I have found that members of the public rarely distinguish among them as lawyers and judges do. To them, a jury is a jury is a jury.


In our Winter newsletter, published in early February this year, we asked the question of whether our current political climate was seeping into the jury room. I asked the question in a piece entitled, Will the Jury Follow the Instructions?-Politics and the Jury. We also provided a link to a thorough and thoughtful examination of the issue by a former research fellow, Professor Richard Jolly.


It is probably too early to tell, but the questions must be asked. Media coverage, both traditional and social, regarding juries is widespread. In this politically divided country, will this seep into our jury system and undermine our confidence in all juries, whether they be grand, criminal or civil?


I am only interested in cases which are widely reported in any type of media. Only those have the potential to affect potential juror attitudes about our jury system. In 1991, one of our Academic Advisors, Professor Valerie P. Hans, wrote, "Thus just as media accounts of the legal world substantially influence citizens' views and attitudes about law, general media coverage can influence jurors' decision making in the courtroom."


Let's start with grand juries.


"Any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."- Sol Wachtler, Chief Justice, New York Supreme Court (1985)


That no longer appears to be the case.


In a widely reported case, a D.C. man was charged with throwing a sandwich at a federal law enforcement officer wearing a bulletproof vest. He was initially charged with a felony, but the grand jury refused to indict him on that charge. He was then charged with misdemeanor assault and, after a three-day trial, was acquitted.


A grand jury declined to indict six Democratic lawmakers for a video they made and published regarding service members' right to disobey clearly unlawful orders from commanders.


Three different grand juries failed to indict a woman on felony charges stemming from a claim that the woman "jerked into an FBI agent's knee" while she was being detained. After less than two hours of deliberations, a jury returned a verdict of not guilty to a single, lesser misdemeanor charge.


And as I write this, prosecutors have been presenting evidence to a grand jury on whether a former White House aide, Cassidy Hutchinson, may have lied to Congress in her testimony relating to the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.


An article by the Pew Research Center (that came out shortly after our Winter 2026 newsletter) reported that in the most recent year with available data (2016) that federal grand juries declined to indict just six people. Between 2007 and 2016 they refused to indict an average of 15 people each year nationwide.


Whether these cases represent a meaningful change in grand jury behavior or merely reflect unusual prosecutions receiving extraordinary publicity remains uncertain. Nevertheless, their visibility raises an important question: Are political attitudes beginning to influence the decisions of citizens summoned to serve as grand jurors?


Next, let's turn to prosecutions.


A study by the Associated Press revealed that the U.S. Justice Department failed to secure felony convictions against most of the 102 protesters arrested in four major cities last year on charges of assaulting federal authorities.


What is the usual conviction rate for assault cases? According to data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, 82% of defendants charged with felony or misdemeanor assault were convicted at trial or with a plea deal in the year 2024. The AP's analysis reveals a conviction rate of less than half. The results of these prosecutions were widely reported in media outlets.


And finally, what will be the effect of pardons and commutations on future juries?


It has been shown in both empirical research and anecdotal interviews that jury service results in the individual juror having a greater respect for our judicial system. What happens to jurors who have devoted days or weeks to hearing evidence, following judicial instructions and reaching a verdict, only to learn that the defendant has subsequently received a pardon? Does that experience diminish their confidence in the judicial system? And might it influence their willingness to serve again?


A January 5, 2024, article in The Washington Post reported that as of January 2, 2024 there were 852 convictions in the prosecutions for the attack on the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Of those, 138 were convicted at trial and there were 714 pleas. The pardons and commutations followed on January 20, 2025. Of course, this was also widely reported.


If jury service ordinarily strengthens citizens' confidence in judicial institutions, what happens when those citizens find out that the results of their service have been reversed by elected officials? Will that affect the attitudes they bring to future jury service, including civil cases? Although governmental immunity will certainly come into play, some civil rights cases under 42 U.S.C. section 1983 brought against government officials may be decided by a civil jury.


The jury system depends not merely on citizens' willingness to serve, but also on their confidence that their service matters. We do not yet know whether today's political controversies are changing how jurors approach their responsibilities. But the question deserves our attention. If confidence in the jury system erodes, the consequences may not necessarily stop at the criminal courtroom door.


Resources:


Richard Loren Jolly, Red Juries & Blue Juries, 57 Ariz. St. L.J. 229 (2025)


Valerie P. Hans and Juliet Dee, "Media Coverage of Law: Its Impact on Juries and the Public" (1991). Cornell Law Faculty Publications. Paper 324.


Norm Tabler, Adventures in the Law: Justice for Ham Sandwiches?, Voice of Experience, ABA Senior Lawyers, February 2026


John Graham Letch, What to know about federal grand juries, Pew Research Center, February 27, 2026


Jamie Ding and Claire Rush, DOJ went after protesters for felony assault, but juries, judges were unconvinced, Los Angeles Times, September 12, 2026.


Marina Dunbar, Man accused of aiming laser at Trump helicopter acquitted in 35 minutes, The Guardian, January 17, 2026


Salvador Rizo, Jury finds D.C. 'sandwich guy' not guilty of assaulting officer, The Washington Post, November 6, 2025.


Alex Woodward, Jeanine Pirro fails again: DC jury finds protester not guilty of assaulting FBI agent in case she can't stop losing on, The Independent, October 16, 2025


Perry Stein and Salvador Rizo, D.C. Grand jury declines to indict six Democratic lawmakers, The Washington Post, February 10, 2026


Sarah N. Lynch and Jacob Rosen, DOJ trying to indict former White House aide Cassidy Hutchinson, who testified about January 6, CBS News, October 8, 2026


Tom Jackman and Spencer S. Hsu, Most Jan. 6 defendants get time behind bars, but less than U.S. seeks, The Washington Post, January 5, 2024


Lauren Ober, I Was a Jan. 6 Juror. What I Learned Surprised Me, The Washington Post, Feb. 17, 2025


Shawn Patterson Jr., Abby Murray, Matthew Levendusky, R. Lance Holbert and Kathleen Hall Jamieson, To Know Courts is to Love Them?, Judicature, Vol. 109, No. 3 (2026)


The Hon. Mark A. Drummond (ret.) is the Executive / Judicial Director of the Civil Jury Project. He was a trial lawyer for 20 years before serving on the bench as a trial court judge in Illinois for 20 years. He is a program director and co-director for Teacher Training for The National Institute for Trial Advocacy. For over 25 years he has written the Practice Points column for Litigation News, a publication of the Litigation Section of the American Bar Association. He is licensed to practice in Illinois and has applied to practice in New York.

Training the Next Generation

of Trial Lawyers in 2026



Delivering the Opening Statement Lecture at NITA's National Public Service Program at Emory Law School

ABA-NITA Legal Services Training Program held at Dorsey & Whitney, LLP in Minneapolis, MN

Tim Dutton OBE KC Advanced International Advocacy Course held at Keble College, Oxford

NITA/Law Society of Northern Ireland: Advanced Advocacy Course-Belfast



Coming soon...November 15th


Last April Judge Bergeron and his co-author, Professor Shannon Price were kind enough to send their manuscript to me to review. After reading it, I sent the following testimonial:


"I was just three pages in when John Grisham's powerful work of nonfiction, The Innocent Man: Murder and Injustice in a Small Town, came to mind. Judge Bergeron's and Professor Price's work here is equally compelling. Moreover, it combines scholarly research through the lens of an actual case. You learn so much about our jury system and its unfortunate decline through the telling of Dean Gillispie's 30-year odyssey through our judicial system. It is a tale both tragic and, ultimately, uplifting. I hope they send a copy to Ken Burns."





Here is the release announcement for their book and a link:


A Must-Read New Book Shines the Spotlight on The Demise of the Jury Trial


In THE JURY’S OUT: The Fight to Save the American Legal System (Cornell University Press; November 15, 2026), retired Judge Pierre H. Bergeron and law professor Shannon Price sound the alarm on a constitutional crisis hiding in plain sight: the disappearing American jury trial.


The right to a jury trial is a critical cornerstone of American democracy. It is a check on power as fundamental as the vote itself. Yet today, only about one percent of cases filed in our courts ever reach a jury trial. The fabled American “day in court” is vanishing—and most of the American public is none the wiser.


People who understand our legal system appreciate the book’s impact: “Brimming with insight about how legal and procedural changes have combined to undercut ‘the people's voice’ in our legal system, The Jury's Out is at once eye-opening, challenging, and deeply humane,” observes Alice Bannon, from the Brennan Center for Justice.


Bergeron and Price trace how tort reform, plea bargaining, procedural gauntlets, and a deeply entrenched elitist critique have hollowed out one of the people’s most potent constitutional rights.


Threading their investigation through the decades-long wrongful-conviction case of Dean Gillispie, Bergeron and Price show what is really at stake when ordinary people lose their day in court. At the same time, they document signs of resistance by a growing coalition of reformers who believe that the jury's decline can indeed be reversed.


Part legal history, part courtroom drama, and part rallying cry, The Jury's Out makes a forceful case that the jury remains democracy’s most underused weapon

and that reclaiming it is a fight that belongs to all of us.


In 2016, the Project sponsored a forum with Professor Suja A. Thomas of the University of Illinois to discuss her book "The Missing American Jury".


In 2021 Professor Thomas interviewed me for her documentary on our justice system. Alas, I was not ready for prime time and my interview ended up on the cutting room floor.


However, I do have tickets to the premier of the documentary here in New York on November 15. The information for the showings can be found here.




 


Look out for Winter 2027 Newsletter!


Contact Information
Civil Jury Project, NYU School of Law
Wilf Hall, 139 MacDougal Street, Room 407, New York, NY 10012
markd56.md@gmail.com
Follow Us
 
Facebook  Twitter  Instagram  Youtube  
 
Stephen Susman
Founder
1943 - 2020
Samuel Issacharoff
Faculty Director

Mark Drummond

Executive/

Judicial Director

Kaitlin Villanueva
Admin. Assistant