I was recently sent a notice for jury duty and was very happy to report to the King County Court House.

I know that this is not a usual response. Many folks would prefer to avoid jury duty: It interrupts one’s life; its length of time is uncertain. But here’s why I think it’s a vital building block of our democracy. The two duties of citizenship in a democracy — voting and jury service — are not only duties, but also privileges. A person sits with folks who may have entirely different political, religious, educational, professional, and economic backgrounds, but are nonetheless one’s peers. Where else would you have such an intimate opportunity with folks so unlike one? Together in the jury room these citizens are practicing the core skills of democracy: deliberation, debate, tolerance, cooperation, civility and decision-making.

And you never know who might be there with you; President Clinton has served on a jury since leaving office. He was simply juror #142, no more nor less a peer.

How did it happen that our country has this court system? It began with the Stamp Act Rebellion, a rebellion against the tax Britain imposed on its American colonists.

But the rebellion was also against King George’s denial of the “benefit of trial by jury.” In fact, this grievance was explicitly listed by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence and helped spark the American Revolution, according to “Why Jury Duty Matters” by Andrew Guthrie Ferguson.

“Like American democracy itself, the jury represents the best ideals of this country. Both democratic citizenship and jury service require participation, deliberation, respect for equality, fairness, dissent, and most importantly, a fundamental faith in individual liberty,” Jefferson wrote.

John Adams, one of the founders of our democracy, believed that “representative government and trial by jury are the heart and lungs of liberty.” He believed this so strongly that he put his life and his family’s lives at stake by taking on the defense of three British soldiers after many citizens were killed in a violent demonstration.

The general belief was that the soldiers had shot into the crowd. He vehemently argued against the prosecution’s case, saying that it had no proof beyond a reasonable doubt. After a lengthy trial, the jury found the soldiers not guilty.

Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia most strongly stated:

“The framers would not have thought it too much to demand that, before depriving a man (or woman, Mr. Justice!) of his liberty, the State should suffer the modest inconvenience of submitting its accusations to the unanimous suffrage of 12 of his (or her) equals and neighbors.”

Of course there were fairly blatant flaws in those early framers’ thinking. Women, non-Europeans or people without property were not offered this duty. Men and women organized, fought and died to repair these flaws. It took years of effort and sacrifice to obtain the right for all 18 years of age and over to sit on a jury.

By Congressional passage of The Jury Selection and Service Act of 1957, racial discrimination was disallowed for men but not women. It wasn’t until 1975 that the Supreme Court decided women could not be excluded.

I sat in the jury room with several hundred others waiting to be called and filled out a questionnaire that would give attorneys and judges a description of me. While waiting, Judge Tanya Thorp took the time to encourage us to take this duty and privilege of jury service seriously, saying we were vital to providing justice.

I was so moved by the judge’s words that I decided to write this article. I went back a week later to interview her.

“Judges value the jurors and respect that you are giving up time away from daily lives to participate in our system of justice,” she said.

We had a long conversation during her lunch hour. She then accompanied me out of her chambers and in the hallway met two other judges. She introduced me to them, explaining my project. They shook my hand and one of them, Judge Samuel Chung, said to me, “Juries are the best part of our job. They always leave the court room smiling.”

In fact many juries come away feeling so good about the experience that they have anniversary get-togethers.

As it turned out I was not selected this time. It was my second call. I hope I’m called again.

— Kate Hunter is a Vashon Island community activist.