Justifying the jury

Reconciling justice, equality, and democracy

Melissa Schwartzberg

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    The jury is a paradigmatic example of a democratic institution that may be justified strictly on instrumental and epistemic grounds: its ability to yield just outcomes. Yet why should we have confidence in its ability? The jury's reliability derives from the jurors' status as local experts (hierarchical equality), as well as near-universal eligibility and selection by lot (horizontal equality): This dual egalitarianism is a condition of the jury's epistemic value. Yet ordinary citizens thereby acquire an interest in epistemic respect or recognition of their presumptively equal competence to judge. The instrumental value of the jury and intrinsic (respect-based) value of jury service may thus be reconciled; although trade-offs between just verdicts and respectful treatment are possible, the jury's ability to attain just verdicts may be improved by reforms generated by concerns about respectful treatment of jurors. This framework sheds light on the justification of democratic institutions more generally.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)446-458
    Number of pages13
    JournalAmerican Political Science Review
    Volume112
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Aug 1 2018

    Fingerprint

    equality
    justice
    democracy
    respect
    ability
    Values
    egalitarianism
    confidence
    expert
    citizen
    reform

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Sociology and Political Science
    • Political Science and International Relations

    Cite this

    Justifying the jury : Reconciling justice, equality, and democracy. / Schwartzberg, Melissa.

    In: American Political Science Review, Vol. 112, No. 3, 01.08.2018, p. 446-458.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Schwartzberg, Melissa. / Justifying the jury : Reconciling justice, equality, and democracy. In: American Political Science Review. 2018 ; Vol. 112, No. 3. pp. 446-458.
    @article{0639c8465d32492fba9a87a75c7e0122,
    title = "Justifying the jury: Reconciling justice, equality, and democracy",
    abstract = "The jury is a paradigmatic example of a democratic institution that may be justified strictly on instrumental and epistemic grounds: its ability to yield just outcomes. Yet why should we have confidence in its ability? The jury's reliability derives from the jurors' status as local experts (hierarchical equality), as well as near-universal eligibility and selection by lot (horizontal equality): This dual egalitarianism is a condition of the jury's epistemic value. Yet ordinary citizens thereby acquire an interest in epistemic respect or recognition of their presumptively equal competence to judge. The instrumental value of the jury and intrinsic (respect-based) value of jury service may thus be reconciled; although trade-offs between just verdicts and respectful treatment are possible, the jury's ability to attain just verdicts may be improved by reforms generated by concerns about respectful treatment of jurors. This framework sheds light on the justification of democratic institutions more generally.",
    author = "Melissa Schwartzberg",
    year = "2018",
    month = "8",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1017/S0003055417000661",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "112",
    pages = "446--458",
    journal = "American Political Science Review",
    issn = "0003-0554",
    publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Justifying the jury

    T2 - Reconciling justice, equality, and democracy

    AU - Schwartzberg, Melissa

    PY - 2018/8/1

    Y1 - 2018/8/1

    N2 - The jury is a paradigmatic example of a democratic institution that may be justified strictly on instrumental and epistemic grounds: its ability to yield just outcomes. Yet why should we have confidence in its ability? The jury's reliability derives from the jurors' status as local experts (hierarchical equality), as well as near-universal eligibility and selection by lot (horizontal equality): This dual egalitarianism is a condition of the jury's epistemic value. Yet ordinary citizens thereby acquire an interest in epistemic respect or recognition of their presumptively equal competence to judge. The instrumental value of the jury and intrinsic (respect-based) value of jury service may thus be reconciled; although trade-offs between just verdicts and respectful treatment are possible, the jury's ability to attain just verdicts may be improved by reforms generated by concerns about respectful treatment of jurors. This framework sheds light on the justification of democratic institutions more generally.

    AB - The jury is a paradigmatic example of a democratic institution that may be justified strictly on instrumental and epistemic grounds: its ability to yield just outcomes. Yet why should we have confidence in its ability? The jury's reliability derives from the jurors' status as local experts (hierarchical equality), as well as near-universal eligibility and selection by lot (horizontal equality): This dual egalitarianism is a condition of the jury's epistemic value. Yet ordinary citizens thereby acquire an interest in epistemic respect or recognition of their presumptively equal competence to judge. The instrumental value of the jury and intrinsic (respect-based) value of jury service may thus be reconciled; although trade-offs between just verdicts and respectful treatment are possible, the jury's ability to attain just verdicts may be improved by reforms generated by concerns about respectful treatment of jurors. This framework sheds light on the justification of democratic institutions more generally.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85049647798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85049647798&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1017/S0003055417000661

    DO - 10.1017/S0003055417000661

    M3 - Article

    VL - 112

    SP - 446

    EP - 458

    JO - American Political Science Review

    JF - American Political Science Review

    SN - 0003-0554

    IS - 3

    ER -