ericans are under the impression that the Constitution of the United States guarantees all residents of the country a right to a trial by a jury of one's peers, or equals. In fact, the Constitution provides no such guarantee. Section 2.3, Article III of the Constitution does state that the trial of all crimes (except impeachment) will be by jury, and that such trial will be held in the state where the crime was committed. The Sixth Amendment to the Constitution amplifies this right by stating that the jury in criminal trials will be "impartial." Impartial, however, does not mean equal. The Seventh Amendment to the Constitution extends the right of trial by jury to civil cases "where the controversy shall exceed twenty dollars." The Seventh Amendment does not specifically require an impartial jury, nor does it require that a civil trial be held within any specific jurisdiction.
The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution prohibits any state from denying to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. The equal protection clause more than any other aspect of the Constitution has been used to attempt to attain representativeness on American juries. Within the context of the equal protection clause, however, it is one thing to hold that equal protection is denied by systematically excluding specific elements of the population from sitting on a jury or juries. It is quite another thing, however, to claim that equal protection is denied because some specific element of the population is not assured representation on a specific jury. Yet, such claims are being made in the United States with increasing frequency (Friedman, 1992, pp. 920-954).
A fair question to pose is one that concerns the reason for the increased interest in jury representation. A major underlying cause is likely the litigation explosion in the United States. With an increasing proportion of the population attempting to settle thei...