Lesson 3.3 – The Jury Trial and Due Process

Another safeguard of liberty woven into the Constitution is the right to a jury trial and the guarantees of due process.These protections ensure that no person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property by the unchecked will of government officials.

At the founding, juries were seen as the people’s check on the state. Madison described trial by jury as “the best security for the rights of the people.” It meant that before punishment could be imposed, ordinary citizens — not distant rulers — had to be convinced of guilt or liability.

Justice Neil Gorsuch has carried this banner into modern jurisprudence. In Rimlawi v. United States (2025), dissenting from denial of certiorari, he wrote:

⭐ “The right to trial by jury should mean no less today than it did at the Nation’s founding.”

He warned against judges increasing restitution or penalties based on their own factual findings, rather than letting juries decide. For Gorsuch, the principle is clear: government cannot bypass the people’s voice when liberty or property is at stake.

Justice Clarence Thomas has likewise emphasized fidelity to original meaning. In Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000, concurrence), Thomas underscored that only juries — not judges alone — may find facts that increase punishment.

Due process extends this principle further. It ensures that laws must be applied fairly, notice must be given, and procedures followed. Without due process, government becomes arbitrary — punishing first, justifying later.

These protections stand against every ideology that seeks to impose punishment or conformity without accountability. Whether through socialist bureaucracies, religious dominion, or compelled identity orthodoxy, the temptation is the same: to bypass the people and impose the will of the state. The jury trial and due process are designed to stop those abuses at the courthouse door.

Finally, we turn to the Constitution’s guarantee of self-defense and sovereignty of the individual — the Second Amendment — which Justice Thomas has declared cannot be relegated to a “second-class right.”