Trial by Jury or Administrative Adjudication: What Would the Founders Say?
The Founders Gave Us the Tools Series
In this Federalist Society America 250 series, experts analyze modern legal and policy debates through the lens of the Founding generation. The Founders gave us the tools to answer many contemporary questions; join us as we explore those answers.
The Founders regarded trial by jury as an indispensable check on government power, and the Fifth and Seventh Amendments enshrined that guarantee. In recent decades, however, the proliferation of administrative adjudication has steadily displaced the jury from disputes between citizens and the state. While the Supreme Court's decision in SEC v. Jarkesy was a significant step toward restoring the constitutional baseline, much work remains. Lower courts continue to rely on Atlas Roofing Co. v. OSHA to uphold agency adjudication of claims that, at the Founding, would have been tried before a jury. Cases like the recently decided FCC v. AT&T and next term's Department of Labor v. Sun Valley Orchards, LLC illustrate just how far modern practice has drifted from constitutional design.
Thomas Jefferson identified the jury "as the only anchor, ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution." Yet today, Americans routinely face penalties imposed by federal agencies, not juries of their peers. Join us for a Federalist Society America 250 panel discussion looking back to the Founding Era to ask: What has become of the right to a jury trial in actions brought by the federal government?
Featuring:
- Robert E. Johnson, Senior Attorney, Institute for Justice
- Prof. Renée Lerner, Donald Phillip Rothschild Research Professor of Law, George Washington University Law School
- Prof. Christopher J. Walker, Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
- (Moderator) Hon. Jennifer Walker Elrod, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
*******
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
