This act prohibits discrimination in federal jury service based on disability or age, ensuring individuals are not excluded if they can perform the essential functions of jury duty with reasonable accommodation.
Lateefah Simon
Representative
CA-12
This Act prohibits discrimination against individuals based on disability or age in federal jury service. It amends federal law to ensure that a disability cannot be used as a basis for exclusion from a jury unless the individual cannot perform the essential functions of service even with a reasonable accommodation. The legislation updates existing jury qualification standards to reflect this nondiscrimination principle.
Federal Juries Must Now Provide 'Reasonable Accommodation' for Jurors with Disabilities
The “Disability and Age in Jury Service Nondiscrimination Act” is pretty straightforward: it updates federal law to explicitly stop courts from using disability as an automatic reason to exclude someone from jury service. Think of this as closing a loophole that allowed for outdated discrimination in the federal court system.
No More 'Infirmity' Excuse
For years, federal law allowed courts to disqualify potential jurors if they had a physical or mental "infirmity." That’s a vague, old-school term that could be used to exclude anyone with a disability, regardless of whether it actually interfered with their ability to serve. This bill scraps that language. Instead, it adds disability to the list of protected characteristics—like race or national origin—that cannot be used to exclude someone from a jury pool (Section 1862).
The Reasonable Accommodation Mandate
The biggest change is the requirement for courts to provide "reasonable accommodation" (Section 1865). This is the key piece that brings the federal jury system into the 21st century. It means that if you use a wheelchair, are deaf, or have a chronic condition, the court can no longer just say, "Sorry, you’re out." If they can make a small, practical change—like providing a ramp, a sign language interpreter, or allowing scheduled breaks—they must do so if it enables you to perform the essential functions of a juror.
For the average person, this is about civic duty and representation. If you’re a software engineer who uses a mobility aid, or a construction manager with hearing loss, you now have the explicit right to participate in the justice system, provided the court can make the necessary adjustments. It ensures that federal juries—which decide everything from major corporate fraud cases to civil rights claims—actually reflect the diverse population they serve, including the 1 in 4 Americans living with a disability.
What Happens Next?
While the intent is clear—to eliminate discrimination—the practical reality hinges on that phrase: "reasonable accommodation." Courts will have to figure out what is considered "reasonable" in the context of a secure, often rigid, courtroom environment. For example, providing a specialized communication device might be reasonable, but completely rebuilding a jury box might not. This is a point of medium vagueness in the bill, meaning we’ll likely see different federal districts interpret and implement the mandate slightly differently at first. However, the core message is undeniable: the door to the federal jury box is now legally required to be open to people with disabilities.