No more jury duty for GLBT people in California

[nichomachus]

I'm a big fan of passive resistance. I know some people want to break windows or burn cars, and I understand that, but I don't approve and won't participate.

I have been thinking of other ways to fight back. The first thing I've come up with is that I will no longer serve on jury duty.

I am due to be called in a month or so (if history is any guide) and I intend to tell the judge.

• I have been declared a second-class citizen in CA
  
  
• As such, I don't feel I should serve on a jury, as I am not a peer of the defendant
  
  
• As a result of the Supreme Court ruling, I have absolutely no faith in the California court system to provide protection or justice for all its citizens
  
  
• I will give absolutely zero credence to any testimony or arguments offered by employees of the state, county or city.
  
  
• Given all of the above, I do not feel I can make a fair or impartial decision in this case.

I think every GLBT person in the state should do the same. We need to let them know we're pissed. This will give us a chance to fuck up the court system and, at the same time, make a case in front of an audience of 30-40 people. If we repeat that a couple of hundred thousand times, maybe people will get the message.

Does this make sense?

Can anyone think of other ways we can fight back legally and non-violently?

[WeDidIt]

1. I think it's a good start.

Refuse to participate in teh judicial system that relegated you to subhuman status.

I like that.

[anigbrowl]

2. Work for a new ballot initiative

It's going to take a million signatures to get a gay marriage proposal onto the ballot. It's not the court's fault that the state constitution currently includes Prop 8.

[Tempest]

3. It is the court's fault Prop 8 is part of the state constitution

They could have been consistent and turned out Prop 8 just like they did Prop 22.

[anigbrowl]

9. No, it isn't.

Prop 22 modified the CA civil code, not the constitution. In cases of conflict, the constitution always takes precedence over the code. Prop 8 modified the constitution itself. There's a big difference.

[Tempest]

22. You're wrong

In overturning Prop 22, the court specifically stated the constitution's equal protection clause was being violated.

Now they're saying the clause doesn't apply and can be superceded.

This is absolutely the court's fault.

[theboss]

29. It can't be superceded by a law; it can be superceded by an amendment

That's the problem here. Prop 8 changed the Constitution; Prop 22 did not.

[Freddie Stubbs]

30. Prop 8 had the effect of modifing the effect of that clause

It amended, or changed the state constitution.

[anigbrowl]

34. You're mixing up the federal and state constitutions

http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/archive/S147999.PDF is the decision affecting Prop 22. It found that the legislative change effected by prop 22 violated the California constitution's equal protection clause, not that created by the 14th Amendment in the federal Constitution. see the concurring opinion by Justice Kennard on pp 122-126 for a succinct explanation which explains the difference between the scope of Federal and State constitutions.

[nichomachus]

4. I know

But, I feel I've got to take a stand somewhere. This is my way of fighting back.

Of course I will sign the petition to get another question on the ballot -- but I'm going to do this too.

Not only will it get an audience in front of the people in court, it will be part of the permanent court transcript too.

[anigbrowl]

13. As a publicity strategy sure, why not.

It's just that I can't blame the court for affirming what the constitution says, unfair and wrong though that is.

[vanbean]

62. You will get thrown in jail.

[kestrel91316]

5. I am doing jury duty the second week in June here in Los Angeles.

In solidarity I am willing to say the same to a judge: As a result of the Supreme Court ruling, I have absolutely no faith in the California court system to provide protection or justice for all its citizens. I will give absolutely zero credence to any testimony or arguments offered by employees of the state, county or city because the government is now being used as a tool to deny an entire class of persons basic human rights.

[WeDidIt]

6. If I lived in CA, I'd do the same thing

I'm a straight man.

[Hepburn]

39. Straight retired female....

...will do the same if called for jury duty.

[nichomachus]

7. Thanks - this needs to go viral

If enough people do it, it will have an impact.

[roody]

41. I'm in too. Although I have never been called for real.

[T Wolf]

8. An alternative is to go on jury duty and then decide based on your own values. Why cede the

fate of people to bigots?

Along the same lines - because it is presumed that I will "swear to tell the truth, etc." on a bible - a fairy tale in which I do not believe, I feel under no obligation to adhere to their rules. I was recently called (coming up next month) and filled out the questionnaire stating that I could be objective, would not be inclined (or disinclined) to believe any testimony by a cop, etc.

If I get on a jury, they will have at least one person who will not provide a pro-prosecution or pro-corporate vote.

Fight them inside or outside. But fight them.

[nichomachus]

12. No -- it's more important to refuse to lend credibility to the process

Once you participate, then you justify the process. I am trying to make a statement that their process is flawed -- by taking part in it, I say it's valid.

[T Wolf]

17. There are times I think that way as well. That is why I won't vote for any of the corporate

Democrats who supposedly "represent" me in Congress (Casey, Spectre(?!?) and Schwartz in PA).

But in this instance, I think I can do more by actually getting on a jury and doing what I can to steer the verdict in the correct direction, by any means necessary.

They will always have enough people on a panel to select a jury, even if you could get a 100% boycott by people who oppose this latest travesty. But, if (and that is a big if) I can get on a jury, I can have an direct effect on that case.

But then, I always prefer direct action rather than (IMO) meaningless political actions like marches or petitions, etc.

[nichomachus]

19. I always vote what I think is the correct verdict

So, I don't see where that makes any kind of a statement.

[T Wolf]

23. Let me clarify - the "correct" verdict (IMO) has little to do with what "the law" says. I

view the goal of the justice system to be to reach justice.

If the case involved a law I did not agree with, there would be no conviction, no matter what "evidence" the cops and DA dreamed up. To me, it is more than an intellectual exercise in interpretation of bullshit verbiage created to maintain a certain status quo situation.

On the other hand - in a civil case against a polluting industry, even if "legally" they could get around consequences for dumping poison in a river (e.g.), I would vote to convict.

The law is not an end in itself, but rather, a means to an end. That end is justice. And we each define justice according to our own values.

[nichomachus]

24. In CA, civil cases don't go to juries

Our local court hasn't heard a civil case in years. The courts are too full of criminal cases and the courts have no money.

[Moonwalk]

64. You're not presumed that you will "swear to the tell the truth" on a bible

I've recently been on Jury Duty. They ask you to raise your hand and swear to tell the truth. No Bible in sight. At least not in California. You just swear it.

[IntravenousDemilo]

10. Yes, refuse to pay your taxes. No taxation without representation! n/m

[mitchtv]

11. great Idea

I am excused already, sadly. If anyone gets picked anyway vote to acquit. let them have a hung jury and another trial for the bad judgement of choosing Gays to jury duty

[ohheckyeah]

14. I think all the same sex couples

with the financial means should go to Oregon and have nice lavish weddings. I wonder how long it would take all the industries involved in weddings to raise hell? Hitting them in the pocketbook is the only thing some people get.

[nichomachus]

26. The industries who engage in weddings are already being hurt

They weren't the ones who created this travesty. It was a collection of hate groups -- the Catholic Church, Evangelicals, the Mormon Cult, Blackwater, Howard Ahmanson, Focus on the Family, the KKK, etc.

[ohheckyeah]

35. The comment was made somewhat tongue in cheek.

I know who was responsible but sometimes a group with a financial interest can become the champion of a cause.

[nichomachus]

36. I know, but they're already hurting

in our area, there were a lot of same-sex weddings because we're a resort. Businesses were doing very well. All of that stopped on election day. Now, the businesses are hurting even more because of the economy. Some restaurants are closing for the summer and some of them may not be back in the fall. Hotel occupancy is down 40 percent. Believe me, these business were strong supporters of same-sex marriage. They loved it -- even businesses that don't normally cater to the gay population. A lot of them contributed to fight Prop H8.

[RufusTFirefly]

15. I think that's a great idea

And I support your efforts to fight back legally and non-violently.

No, by this I'm not suggesting that people should be patient. It's way too late for that. As Martin Luther King once put it "'Wait' has almost always meant 'never.'" But you know that Faux and the Fundies are going to have a field day with gay people run amok.

The only thing about skipping jury duty is that the decision should be announced publicly somehow. Simply opting out makes legal sense, but the state and the media need to know that this is an organized, lawful rebellion, not simply some isolated incidents.

[readmoreoften]

16. There would be all-straight juries. Is that what we want? I'd rather people break windows.

All straight people deciding the guilt or innocence of "gay panic" cases or the fates of LGBT youth on trial for fighting back bullies. Seriously. Depriving ourselves of participation in the justice system is not going to solve our problems.

Broken windows at City Hall are better than a broken justice system.

[T Wolf]

18. Broken windows accomplish nothing. You must break those who look out of those windows.

Windows don't take away rights - people do.

[readmoreoften]

31. Were there no broken windows at Stonewall? Broken windows are irrelevant.

Broken windows or unbroken windows are irrelevant. What is important is the impact an act has and our political will. There were broken windows and molotov cocktails thrown at Stonewall. Today, the many of the 1000 participants would be in federal prison on homeland security charges.

I have to wonder why the hell we are so concerned about windows when the state is basically acting violently against LGBT people in California. The state is sanctioning the violent separation of us from our loved ones on their death beds. The state is sanctioning the confiscation of our property against our will--in some cases, the state is the one benefiting from the confiscation.

Breaking windows is neither here nor there. The question is: why the hell are we worried about windows? Has this country become so goddamned materialistic that we value the lifespan of a window over our own lives?

Yes, let's break the power of those people who sit behind those windows. But let's also be clear, when a window breaks it is not an attack on the window. It is a threat to those behind the window: you fuck with us we fuck with you--you cannot stop us.

If there is a nicer way of saying that, let's do so. Unfortunately, no one has found a polite and gentle way to "break them." Further fucking up the justice system in some abstract protest is not going to do a damn thing for any of us.

[Eyerish]

21. But don't we already have a broken justice system??

This would just be merely pointing out to others how corrupt and broken it really is.

[readmoreoften]

27. It's too abstract a connection for most people. No one wants to serve on juries.

It could be easily used against us to say we're lazy. Sorry It's a dumb idea and serves no purpose. It also has nothing to do with the court that levied this decision. Prop 8 didn't get upheld in a criminal court.

[roody]

42. Let's do both.

[RufusTFirefly]

20. It would be great if married straight people could stage some sort of public protest in solidarity

Not sure what though.

It's crucial to emphasize that this isn't simply a "gay" issue. It's a civil rights and Constitutional issue.

[ColbertWatcher]

25. "I am not a peer of the defendant" Brilliant strategy. k+r, n/t

[arcadian]

28. Don't pay your taxes.

When the IRS contacts you, tell them to fuck off.

[EndersDame]

32. If I were a Californian -no more state taxes

[livefreest]

33. YEAH. no more duties without full rights

[Toasterlad]

37. Love This Plan. I'm Going to Use In PA Next Time I Get Called.

[flyarm]

38. excellent Idea!!!..do it!!! eom

[nichomachus]

40. HA HA HA wouldn't you know it

My jury service notice came in this afternoon's mail.

BRING 'EM ON!

[Lucky Luciano]

61. Are you serious? What are tomorrow's lottery numbers? nt

[Posteritatis]

63. Ha, nice! Let us know how it goes (nt)

[WillyT]

43. Jury Duty ??? - Hell... The GLBT Community Shouldn't Have To Pay Taxes Either !!!

"Taxation without representation is tyranny."

James Otis
US politician in American Revolution (1725 - 1783)

:mad:

:kick:

[arthritisR_US]

47. exactly! I posted before reading this and you said it so much more succinctly and brilliantly! n/t

[arthritisR_US]

44. don't pay state or federal taxes either! Neither will give you equal rights and

privileges so they shouldn't have any rights to your money, IMO!

[alfredo]

45. Show up, but for every case you should be able to address the judge.

You are speaking right to a judge and telling him or her right to her face. Doing the way you are proposing to do it you might only be speaking to some clerk who will pass it on to the sheriff.

I never had to sit on a jury because I told the truth to the judge. Lawyers don't like people who are honest about their feelings. The prosecution wouldn't want you on a jury. If enough gays and lesbians do the same, they will get the message. You want us to be responsible citizens, treat us as full citizens.

Do show up, but do face the judge before they start picking juries.


BTW, you will get paid for that day.

Gays and lesbians should not have to pay taxes if they are not afforded equal rights.

[nichomachus]

50. I'm pretty sure that's what I said I would do

I said I would show up and address the judge.

I used to be a court clerk, so I kind of know how the process works.

Also, in CA, you don't get paid until the second day of jury duty.

[alfredo]

51. In Ky you get paid from day one. I'm sleep deprived so I must have missed

that part of your OP.

[Nikki Stone1]

46. Black armbands?

Or maybe rainbow armbands.

[Greyhound]

48. Rioting is far better at garnering the attention you desperately need.

What if your brothers and sisters had your attitude at stonewall?

Violence is what sells in America.

And sex...

Hmmm...

OK, if you don't want to go the riot route, how about organizing a massive "fuck in" in Sacramento?

C'mon, picture it, a sea of writhing homos blocking traffic for a mile in every direction from the Capital, right downtown, while the fucktard legislators are in session. What "Infotainment" show could resist?

[MadMaddie]

49. I was telling my spouse today I wish there was a way

for all Gays to move out of CA and with them they take their money to a state that will afford them equal rights. (I know it's not feasible, but only if it were possible....It would devastate the already screwed up CA economy.

If it were possible to get not only the Gay community but supporters to simply stop spending their money except for basic needs, I have a feeling that something would change.

Repugs and the haters only understand the mighty dollar it is time to start hitting them where it hurts. They have no problem taking tax dollars from gays....but equal rights.....

[earcandle]

52. I think a non verbal declaration would be more effective

and less dangerous to your reputation and standing in the
world.

Instead of making the aforementioned declaration, which might
land you in jail
and cause all hell and give people ammunition about how anti
social gays can be,
just make a silent agreement that you will make the
appropriate legal excuses
and be excused legally from service. no?  

other forms: do not sign up for the military, do not take
foster children into your homes,
do not invest in stocks and bonds that are run by conservative
markets, withdraw your
support from commerce and events that have conservative roots,
be a silent majority that no longer
participates and you will see a great void in the country,
while the rest of us get this
back on the ballot and vote again, in numbers that will set
this record straight.

my two cents, for what it is worth.

[AngryAmish]

53. About not beiing a peer - you realize that is a British thing

Magna carta and whatnot.

[Recursion]

59. Gentlemen didn't want to be tried by commoners

It's one of those things that still has crept into people's consciousnesses.

[SkyDaddy7]

54. I think that is awesome...

Just hope you are not in some old bigoted Judge's Court Room...I live in Georgia and I am afraid you might get locked up here on some made up charge. Of course, "disorderly conduct" os the catch all charge in Ga. If they can't think of anything you have done wrong they always fall back on that.

Hopefully California is not as backward as Georgia, hopefully!

GOOD LUCK!!!

[Voice for Peace]

55. Last time I went for jury duty, I told the judge that I didn't consider it my duty in life

to judge another human being.

The defense attorney tried really hard to get me on the jury.
True!
:rofl:

[omega minimo]

56. Street prank interventions on trophy wives, Barbie clones and other Sex-and-The-City fashion victims

Every city with its own crew of Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence.

State workers who denounce jury duty and state jobs.

Boycotts of all but gay friendly products/companies.

[Auggie]

57. You want an opinion?

Serve on a jury. The accused need to be judged by compassionate, well-educated people like yourself. Don't make them suffer for the injustice of others. We'll get 8 overturned with another proposition in CA very soon.

[Recursion]

58. A lot of us from DC do that with federal jury duty

I think dcvote.org has some information on the "right" way to do that (there's some technical issues about being an unnamed party to a suit against the government that apparently works pretty well on the Federal level; try it at the state level).

As a little point, I'd avoid the "peer" language; nothing in the Constitution guarantees a jury of one's peers, that's a relic of English common law from the Magna Carta that was to insure that gentlemen couldn't be tried by commoners. Other than that, I think it's a great idea. Best of luck.

[Lucky Luciano]

60. Pretty clever.

:thumbsup:

[Ms. Toad]

65. You think no GLBT person is ever tangled up with

the court system?

You want to deprive them of their right to a jury of their peers?

Sounds a little bit like cutting off your nose to spite your face - hope you never become the nose by need the services of a compassionate GLBT jury peer.

[PurgedVoter]

66. Gandhi had a solution called, Satyagraha

In 1913 the British Supreme Court declared non Christian marriages illegal. This made most Indian marriages null and void. At once turning wives into mistresses, and children into bastards. Submission or violence seemed the only choices, but Gandhi came up with a third method. Not passive resistance, active resistance.

My advice would be to pay taxes, serve as jurors, and start a few simple churches. In these churches, have weddings. In services, pronounce, in your creed, the right for pairs of adults to bond in matrimony and become one. At this point, any further issues become religious persecution.

Be sure to marry someone able to stay will you during your whole life. Stay married and lead constructive happy lives. Consider doing this a gift to the next generation. Poor statistics will otherwise be used against the next generation.