Federal Jury Trials to Restart in Nebraska in July

You can read the just-released report from the committee that the District Court appointed to study this, with illustrations; here's a sample of how jurors would be seated:

"A separate space/room will be provided for public viewing via livestream,
of both voir dire and trial."  Masks won't be required in the courtroom, because "When seated and socially distanced, masks are optional"; presumably this means witnesses won't be masked, though "decisions to use a mask may be made by individual jurors, counsel or staff members, with permission of the Court."

This is just one federal district, of course, but I'm sure many courts are making similar plans.

Comments

[AmosArch]

They should bring 'Can't breathe' signs and set fire to the courthouse, and start looting the building for anything that isn't nailed down in the name of intersectional justice. Then they wouldn't have to social distance or any other extra measures and can pack as many people as they want according to progressives.

[Sarcastr0]

This continues to be a pretty bad talking point, even if you really love it and can't stop posting it over and over.

Just because your crappy 'lockdown is commu-tyranny' protests didn't get any traction doesn't mean there's a double-standard because these did.

Plenty of stories about the impacts of the unrest to COVID rates.

[AmosArch]

And you guys don't give a crap about COVID anymore...at least when it comes to your side.

[Sarcastr0]

Plenty of stories about the impacts of the unrest to COVID rates.

Read to the end, AA.
https://www.npr.org/2020/06/01/866540171/health-officials-worry-mass-protests-could-ignite-coronavirus-surge

[Dilan Esper]

Just because your crappy ‘lockdown is commu-tyranny’ protests didn’t get any traction doesn’t mean there’s a double-standard because these did.

It doesn't mean there isn't either, Sarcastro.

Look, at the end of the day, I think protests are protected by the First Amendment and a required exception to social distancing laws. But you know what? I also thought that about protests against social distancing. I had one objection, which was the idiots who brought guns to state capitols. That was outrageous.

But going out and protesting? That's legitimate.

And I think what happened is a lot of people on the left made very smug arguments about folks protesting things they didn't think should be protested, and said how horrible these people were and how they were going to spread the virus.

And if that's your position, well, what about a 10,000 person street demonstration. Do we have a responsibility not to exercise our First Amendment rights because of a pandemic or not?

I realize the counter-argument is "it is a better cause", but time place and manner is still applicable. You could have imagined a different world where people called off the protests until after the pandemic was over, saying it is too important not to spread the virus.