California gives non-citizens ability to serve on juries OCD_OCD: SACRAMENTO, California (AP) -- The California Assembly passed a bill on Thursday that would make the state the first in the nation to allow non-citizens who are in the country legally to serve on jury duty. Assemblyman Bob Wieckowski, D-Fremont, said his bill, AB1401, would help California widen the pool of prospective jurors and help integrate immigrants into the community. It does not change other criteria for being eligible to serve on a jury, such as being at least 18, living in the county that is making the summons, and being proficient in English. The bill passed 45-25 largely on a party-line vote in the Democratic-controlled Assembly and will move on to the Senate. One Democrat - Assemblyman Adam Gray, of Merced - voted no, while some other Democrats did not vote. Democratic lawmakers who voted for the bill said there is no correlation between being a citizen and a juror, and they noted that there is no citizenship requirement to be an attorney or a judge. Republican lawmakers who opposed Wieckowski's bill called it misguided and premature. Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, R-Dana Point, said there is no shortage of jurors. "Jury selection is not the problem. The problem is trial court funding," Harkey said before the vote. "I hope we can focus on that. Let's not break something; it's not broken now. Let's not whittle away at what is reserved for U.S. citizens. There's a reason for it." Wieckowski's office said the bill is the first of its kind in the nation and suggested that courts regularly struggle to find enough prospective jurors because jury duty is often seen as an inconvenience, if not a burden. His office did not cite any statistics but pointed to a 2003 legislative report that said numerous articles have noted high rates of non-participation. OCD_OCD: No, just no. And that doesn't even address the blatant issue of the Constitutionality of this madness. Chad_: Are they crazy...............This is the reason why I left California 6 years ago....... You dont know the laws here but you will judge people that are citizens.....please Chad_: I thought it was suppose to be a panel of your piers??? ...Your piers are other citizens I thought.........Not saying in anyway they are not equal....but they are not other citizens....... That would be like me being on a jury of another country ........wont work.....at all......... (Edited by Chad_) OCD_OCD: They will get a chance to get a dose of reality before long. The entire state will be in bankruptcy and will demand that other states bear the burden of their stupidity. OCD_OCD: They apparently believe that the money makers can always be taxed more in order to benefit the unions, the massive influx of illegal aliens and the welfare community. Need more money? Tax business and the workers. Don't want to have to pay taxes? Stop working and just claim any of the umpteen benefits available....because benefits are "free" and everyone deserves to have whatever they wish. one_two_x_u: I personally don't see anything wrong with it. If someone is on a jury it is their responsibility to consider the case fairly regardless of any differences in nationality! All kinds of people are American citizens (different religions, different backgrounds, different races etc..), so what difference does it really make?! Can someone explain to me why they think it's bad other than the paranoia that someone of a different nationality will judge them in a different way to that of someone of the same nationality? Serabi: Sounds very African to me - like kangaroo courts. Don't know the laws but decide on another's fate because you can! OCD_OCD: One_two.....the fact that they aren't CITIZENS of the US means that they are not eligible to be on a jury. Different religions, backgrounds, race does not matter. It's the citizenship that matters. OCD_OCD: Because it's our legal system. I don't want to have someone on a jury who lives in a country that believes in Sharia law. I don't want to be on a jury with someone who doesn't understand the language enough to know what's going on. But the most important thing is that it is not Constitutional under the US Constitution. one_two_x_u: But someone might live in America and believe in whatever law they want. It doesn't make any difference. It says right there that they must be 18+ and be proficient in English, so they will understand what's going on. What does it matter if its not under Constitutional under the US Constitution? That is not the be all and end all. | Politics Chat Room 45 People Chatting Similar Conversations |