Minnesota Law Review

Note, Armchair Jury Consultants: The Legal Implications and Benefits of Online Research of Prospective Jurors in the Facebook Era

Jury consulting is a longstanding practice in American courtrooms. The advent of the Internet and social networking, however, has moved the practice away from high-paid professionals, and has allowed practicing attorneys to become amateur jury consultants. It is now common practice for attorneys, either before or during jury selection, to conduct Internet research on prospective jurors. This research, because it mines such information-rich sources, is extremely valuable to attorneys concerned about the composition of their jury pool.

The Note examines this pervasive practice in the context of current jury selection jurisprudence. The Note analyzes–and ultimately dispels—common criticisms of the practice: that it infringes upon juror privacy, that it is ethically questionable, that it leads to undue manipulation of the jury pool, that it may lead to pretextual strikes for cause, and that it undermines the fairness of trials. The Note instead contends that such investigation of prospective jurors comports with the traditional reasons for peremptory challenges and results in a balanced jury pool. Finally, the Note argues that because of the benefits inherent in this practice, courts should uniformly release prospective juror information prior to trial, and should officially sanction the practice.

:: View PDF

De Novo

  • Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte

    EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit.[1] Although the case presented many serious [...]

  • Revisiting Water Bankruptcy

    REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself[1]—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water [...]

  • Defying Auer Deference

    DEFYING AUER DEFERENCE: SKIDMORE AS A SOLUTION TO CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS IN PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION Nicholas R. Bednar, Volume 100, Lead Articles Editor* On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.[1]F The Court overturned the D.C. [...]