Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jury Duty topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate rejects bill to excuse law-enforcement officers from jury duty, 33-14
Summary
Senate Bill 2095, which would have excused law-enforcement officers from jury duty, failed on the floor after extended debate over civic duty and public-safety trade-offs. The judiciary committee had recommended a do-not-pass.
The North Dakota Senate voted down Senate Bill 2095, 33-14, rejecting a proposal to excuse law-enforcement officers from jury duty.
Senator Kari Myrdal, reporting the Judiciary Committee's recommendation, told the chamber the committee issued a do-not-pass and emphasized that jury service is a civic duty that should not be broadly exempted even though the committee understood the bill's intent to keep officers on duty.
"A jury duty is a sacred duty for all Americans and all citizens to participate in," Senator Myrdal said, urging colleagues to respect the cross-section represented by juries.
Senator Larson, who introduced the bill on the floor, told colleagues that law enforcement and taxpayers suffer when officers are held out of service for jury calls that often end in excusal. "The taxpayers pay law enforcement to be out there keeping our community safe," Larson said, arguing that officers are frequently dismissed after partial service and that the time away is a practical drain on resources.
Opponents cautioned that creating an exemption could become a slippery slope, with other public-safety roles (firefighters, ER nurses) seeking carve-outs. Senator Murdock said exemptions could erode the fairness of jury selection and observed there may be times when law-enforcement experience on a jury is desirable.
After floor remarks and questions, the Senate recorded a final tally of 14 yeas and 33 nays; the measure failed.
No formal amendments were adopted on the floor. The proposal now dies unless reintroduced or otherwise scheduled for future consideration.
