President of the United States, Reporting for Jury Duty

Joshua Lott/Getty Images

In November of 2017, President Barack Obama was greeted by the masses outside a Chicago, Illinois courthouse. The personable leader exchanged pleasantries with his constituents, posed for photos, and accepted requests for his famous autograph. He was not about to make a speech, or attend a fundraiser. The President was reporting for duty – jury duty. President Obama wore his red juror tag proudly, and even collected his $17.20 daily stipend. The New York Times reported that his presence “injected an odd, cocktail party feel to a room that usually seems more like the waiting room at a doctor’s office.”

During Obama’s first presidential term, his comrade and Vice President, Joe Biden, reported for jury duty in Wilmington, Delaware. In 2015, President George W. Bush cheerfully arrived to complete his civic obligation at the George Allen Courts Building in Dallas, Texas.

Apparently White House occupants weren’t the only ones receiving jury summons in recent years. Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan purportedly waited in a courtroom for hours in Washington, D.C. while voir dire was conducted. Unsurprisingly, Kagan was dismissed from duty. Three years later, she responded to another summons at the D.C. Superior Court.

How might a national leader affect jury deliberations?

The first major impact of such a distinguished visitor to the jury booth would likely be the exhibition of it all. Fellow jurors would doubtless be distracted for the duration of the trial, as is evidenced from the flood of Twitter pictures stemming from the Dallas courthouse where George W. Bush reported for duty. Other celebrities have been dismissed purely due to the diversionary nature of their presence. And even after the trial, journalists would posit whether the ultimate jury decision was actually just, or whether a former president’s political motivations played a key role in the outcome.

On another note, Barack Obama was educated at Ivy League schools and became editor of the Harvard Law Review, and later a University of Chicago professor and Nobel Prize winner. Joe Biden was the sixth-youngest U.S. senator when he was sworn into office. George Bush was also an Ivy Leaguer, and served as governor of Texas for years. Elena Kagan is one of the preeminent legal minds of our time. They were each, to say the least, “conspicuously qualified” to be members of the jury. But often being too qualified to understand the intricacies of the law precludes an individual from sitting on the jury. Attorneys fear fellow members of their profession or similarly-credentialed people will be prone to preconceived notions about the case, see through the weaknesses in the arguments, and sway the other jurors too heavily during deliberations. Even the ABA has made efforts to exclude lawyers from jury duty in the past. Perhaps it was not a disservice to the defendants in these cases to exclude presidents and judges from their juries, as there is a chance that “[n]o other juror would want to contradict a former president."

Ultimately, though, these leaders showing up to perform their civic duties sends a clear message to the general public – jury duty is a privilege, a requirement, and non-discriminatory. When a Supreme Court Justice makes it a point report for duty, we would all be advised to do the same if it’s in our power. One Chicago judge noted, "If the former president of the United States takes his time to come, anybody ought to be willing to come." After responding to his summons, Biden told the press that he did not see himself as different from any other citizen, and felt honored to participate in the justice system in this fundamental role.

Who would have thought that a jury summons was actually the great equalizer?