a controversial bill that's been bounced around Trenton for decades May finally have the momentum it needs to pass lawmakers are seriously considering legislation that'll allow people with previous criminal convictions to serve on juries supporters say the law has long created racial disparities in jury pulls but as Ted Goldberg reports a recent Amendment to the bill could derail its chances if we're going to say that we're allowing second chance there can't be no butt as city councilman Frank Gilmore helps write laws that run Jersey City but because of a drug conviction from 20 years ago he can't serve on a jury a lot of people are perplexed they didn't actually didn't believe me and they was like but you're elected official that's impossible like why you can't sit on a um jury they like are you sure like they're interrogating me asking me questions excluding all of those people for prior convictions it just seems like we're double Dow even though you've served your time and now you should be able to participate in the judicial system like everyone else lawmakers in Trenton are trying to pass a law that would allow people with convictions in New Jersey to serve as jurors under New Jersey Law you can't do that if you've been convicted of an indictable offense generally known as a felony different versions of this Bill had exceptions for aggravated sexual assault or murder but the version reintroduced by assemblywoman Verina Reynolds Jackson does not always the excuse of well what about this and what about this and what about this and the list will go on and on according to the New Jersey Institute for social justice hundreds of thousands of people can't serve on juries in New Jersey with disproportional impact on people of color a quarter to a third of the entire black population of New Jersey is banned from a space so we're whitewashing these jury pools the bill has not come up for a vote in committee Republican senator John bramnick doesn't think it will get any support from the GOP and says the law could interfere with the jury selection process or Vader this bill was not clear as to whether you could have this potential juror even go off even if even if the judge believed there was cause so uh the bill in my judgment was not ready for Prime Time assemblywoman Reynolds Jackson says that's not the case and under the bill lawyers can still request for jurors to be dismissed if they think their background might influence their judgment it keeps it optional right it keeps it it makes it where that they could be if the attorney wanted to invoke the vaer process they could do that but it doesn't make it mandatory you've got somebody on the stand who was um let's say a victim of a burglary and on the jury are two people who who burglarized houses uh I I don't think so Gilmore says he could be unbiased while serving on a drug drug case even though drug charges put him in prison for seven years the work that I do speak to me having to be impartial I vote on budgets that speak to police um salaries and things like that so I'm I'm already in a field of work while I have to remain neutral and I have to do what's in the best interest of what's right one of the sponsors of a previous bill with exceptions Senator Brian stack recently pulled his sponsorship of that original Bill we reached out to Senator stack chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee where the new bill will be considered and we didn't hear back without his support a bill like this could die in committee or lead to a different bill that restores jury duty for people with lower level convictions for NJ Spotlight news I'm Ted Goldberg