Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jury Selection topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel recommends adding public‑assistance recipients to master jury list, with confidentiality protections
Summary
The Senate Judiciary Committee recommended a due-pass for SB 2054, which would expand the lists used to form the master jury pool to include recipients of unemployment compensation and public assistance, and make those portions of the master list confidential pending a state-plan amendment by the Department of Health and Human Services.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to give a due-pass recommendation to Senate Bill 2054, a Supreme Court–requested measure to broaden and better diversify the master jury list.
Sarah Behrens, a staff attorney with the State Court Administrator's Office, told the committee the statute now includes voter rolls, utility customers, property taxpayers, motor vehicle registrations and drivers’ licenses but still misses many citizens. "Not everyone has a driver's license. Not everyone has a vehicle or owns property," Behrens said, arguing the currently listed sources do not capture a true cross section of the population.
SB 2054 would add people receiving unemployment compensation and those receiving public assistance and child-care assistance to the lists that make up the master jury list. Behrens said the office worked with the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to draft the bill and that confidentiality provisions in the DHHS systems require a contingency: the portion of the law drawing on DHHS lists would go into effect only after DHHS amends its state plan and notifies legislative management.
Travis Fink, executive director of the North Dakota Commission on Legal Counsel for Indigence, testified in support. Fink said broadening the jury pool improves trial fairness and public confidence, noting that some prospective jurors who are day laborers or renters may be missed by the current list sources. "What this does is, again, gives us some more fair cross section," he said, and the commission asked for a due‑pass recommendation.
Committee members asked whether the change was intended to expand pool size or just diversity; Behrens said it was to better achieve the Sixth Amendment objective of a fair cross section and to include groups currently underrepresented. Behrens explained the DHHS-related list additions would remain confidential under the bill to protect personal information while allowing clerk offices to pull names for jury selection.
After testimony the committee approved a due-pass motion; the roll-call vote was unanimous among senators present. No opposition testimony was recorded during the hearing.
Next steps: the committee recommended the bill be carried to the floor with a due‑pass recommendation, subject to DHHS completing any required state-plan amendment for the confidentiality trigger to operate.
