Reexamination Clause

                The topic for this Constitution Monday comes from the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States:  “In Suits at common law … no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.”  This means that no changes can be made once the jury has made and reported their decision.

                W. Cleon Skousen explained that “no judge of a trial court can substitute his opinion of the facts for that of the jury, nor can an appellate court set aside the jury’s findings and make a final order on its own.

                “In case of a mistrial, the court may order a hearing before another jury, or a new trial can be ordered by an appellate court if there was an error of law committed by the trial court.”  (See “The Making of America – The Meaning and Substance of the Constitution, p. 710.)

                David F. Forte of The Heritage Foundation explained the Reexamination Clause:  “The principle that juries determine questions of fact is a fundamental underpinning of our legal system.  The Seventh Amendment was drafted in response to complaints raised during the ratification process that the Constitution failed to protect the institution of the civil jury.  The Reexamination Clause, in particular, answered the chorus of objections in the ratifying conventions that the Supreme Court’s appellate power `both as to Law and Fact’ would effectively abolish the civil jury by allowing the Supreme Court to retry facts on appeal.  It is for this reason that Justice Joseph Story characterized the Reexamination Clause as `more important’ than the initial phrase of the amendment guaranteeing juries in civil trials….” (See The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, p. 361.)

Trial by Jury

                The topic of discussion for this Constitution Monday comes from the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America:  “In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserve….”  This provision gives each defendant in a civil case the same right as one in a criminal trial IF the case involves at least $20.

                “W. Cleon Skousen explained, “The Founders had originally provided for a jury trial in criminal cases but had not included civil cases for two reasons:  (1) Civil procedures were so varied in the states that it was not considered justifiable to impose the jury system on those that were using judges to decide both civil and equity cases.  (2) It was felt that judges would be more competent to assess damages and liabilities in damage suits and contract cases than a jury.”  (See The Making of America – The Substance and Meaning of the Constitution, p. 710.)

                Eric Grant of The Heritage Foundation explained, “Toward the end of the Constitutional Convention, Hugh Williamson of North Carolina noted that `no provision was yet made for juries in civil cases and suggested the necessity of it.’  Elbridge Gerry agreed, while George Mason further argued that the omission demonstrated that the Constitution needed a Bill of Rights.  Nathaniel Gorham responded that the question should be left to Congress because of complexities in determining what kind of civil cases should be given to a jury.  A few days later, when Gerry and Pinckney moved to insert `And a trial by jury shall be preserved as usual in civil cases,’ Gorham argued that there was no usual form, because the structure of civil juries varied among the states.  Apparently sensing the difficulty in phrasing the guarantee, the Convention unanimously defeated the motion.

                “It was a costly oversight, for the omission of a guarantee of civil juries occasioned the greatest opposition to the Constitution in the ratifying conventions….

                “The Seventh Amendment, passed by the First Congress without debate, cured the omission by declaring that the right to a jury trial shall be preserved in common-law cases, thus leaving the traditional distinction between cases  at law and those in equity or admiralty, where there normally was no jury….”  (See The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, pp. 358-359.)