[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 39 (Wednesday, April 13, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: April 13, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                 BLIND CITIZENS' RIGHT TO JURY SERVICE

                                 ______


                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, April 13, 1994

  Ms. NORTON. Mr. Speaker, today I introduce the District of Columbia 
Right to Jury Service Amendment Act of 1994. The bill would ensure that 
blind citizens of the District of Columbia will not be automatically 
excluded from jury service.
  By statute, the District of Columbia jury system entitles all 
litigants who are entitled to a trial by jury to the right to grand and 
petit juries selected from a fair cross section of the citizens of the 
District.
  Under current law, a citizen of the District of Columbia may not be 
excluded or disqualified from service as a juror because of race, 
color, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, economic status, 
marital status, age, mental infirmity, or most important for the 
purpose of this bill, a physical handicap. However, until 1993, it was 
the practice of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia to 
automatically disqualify prospective jurors who were blind but 
otherwise met all other qualifications.
  This policy, based on assumptions that blind persons could not fully 
appreciate the veracity or credibility of evidence or witnesses, or 
that visual observation is an essential function or attribute of a 
juror's duties, was rejected by U.S. District Judge Joyce Hens Green in 
Galloway v. Superior Court of the District of Columbia, 816 F. Supp. 
12, 16 (D.D.C. 1993). Judge Green held that categorically 
discriminating against blind persons violated three Federal laws; 
namely, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,\1\ Title II of the Americans 
with Disabilities Act of 1990,\2\ and the Civil Rights Act of 1871.\3\ 
The Superior Court now excuses prospective blind jurors from service 
only in particular cases in which vision is a necessary qualification 
for service. However, the City Council, by resolution, has requested a 
statutory change, to prohibit the automatic exclusion of blind persons 
from jury service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

     \o\tnotes at end of article.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  While the bill would prohibit courts from implementing any policies 
which would automatically disqualify blind citizens from jury service, 
the bill would not provide for the automatic inclusion of blind 
citizens for jury service. The decision of whether a prospective blind 
juror would be able to serve would be determined on a case-by-case 
basis by judges, attorneys, and the voir dire process.
  Judge David Norman, a legally blind person, presided over numerous 
trials in the District of Columbia Superior Court for 10 years--from 
1973 to 1983. His disability did not interfere with his ability to make 
factual findings. Blind lawyers who have tried both civil and criminal 
cases in Superior Court evaluate the credibility of witnesses and the 
content of physical evidence. It follows that blind jurors can evaluate 
witnesses and evidence as well. Blind citizens may already serve as 
jurors in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
  In enacting this legislation, the District of Columbia would join at 
least 10 other jurisdictions that have enacted similar legislation, 
including California, Oklahoma, Massachusetts, New York, Oregon, South 
Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
  Service on juries both preserves the democratic process and protects 
the right of parties. Jury service is an honor and privilege that 
should be available to all qualified citizens. Blindness should not in 
and of itself abrogate the privileges and rights accorded to all 
citizens of the United States.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.


                               footnotes

     \1\Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act prohibits programs 
     or activities receiving Federal financial assistance from 
     denying benefits to individuals with handicaps.
     \2\Title II prohibits entities from denying an individual 
     with a disability participation in, or the benefits of, 
     services, programs, activities sponsored by that entity.
     \3\Section 1983 forbids deprivation of rights, privileges, or 
     immunities secured by the Constitution.

                          ____________________