> In a seismic 2024 ruling with direct relevance to Sun Valley, SCOTUS ruled that citizens are entitled to a jury trial when hit with civil penalties imposed by administrative law judges.
"Citizens are entitled to a jury trial". Is this really the hill you're going to die on — arguing that it's a terrible thing that people are entitled to defend themselves in court?
> In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and 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.
> Denied access to an outside court or jury, the Marinos were subjected to an in-house agency process from pillar to post. Pursuit by DOL agents, enforcement by DOL personnel, trial by DOL attorneys, decision by DOL judge, and approval by DOL appellate judges.
The farm was accused of violating labor laws, sued for a half million dollars, got tried and convicted by an internal DOL judge with no jury. Just really, seriously try to argue to me that the drafters of the 7th amendment considered what happened here to be outside the scope of the 7th amendment. They would have said:
"right of trial by jury shall be preserved, unless the federal government sets up an entire parallel legal system to avoid the inconvenience of taking people to trial before taking their livelihoods"
"Citizens are entitled to a jury trial". Is this really the hill you're going to die on — arguing that it's a terrible thing that people are entitled to defend themselves in court?