View Single Post
Old April 22, 2013, 08:53 AM   #14
JimDandy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 8, 2012
Posts: 2,556
Al, I realize what we're discussing is hypothetical and generalities so we don't actually need someone to be a test case to get a judgement proving out theories. With that said, if someone is involuntarily committed, they likely would not be allowed to vote or sit on a jury. The fact that no election or jury summons may or may not have been held or issued shouldn't alter that. Much like the same principle involved in the Negative Commerce Clause doctrine- which is basically the Federal Govt telling the states that just because they weren't playing with it, it was still Uncle Sam's ball, and he's taking it away.

So to apply the same principle- because a judge would not let someone adjudicated sit on a jury, they lost the right to be on a jury, not?
JimDandy is offline  
 
Page generated in 0.03040 seconds with 8 queries