7th Amendment Summary
Under the oppression of the British parliament,
the American colonists were struck by the Navigation Acts, which controlled the
taxation and importation/exportation imposed by maritime commerce. As the
oppression grew, trials grew more frequent. These trials, however, were decided
in distinct and separate courts—and those tried had no right to a trial by
jury. A trial by jury implies a public and open trial. A jury checks the honesty of the court;
and the British weren’t willing to
be checked at this time. After the American Revolution, the colonists realized
the importance of imposing an equal right to trial by jury—and so in 1791, the
seventh amendment was ratified in the Bill of Rights.
The seventh amendment includes two clauses. The
first clause includes the right to a trial by jury. Four requirements must be
present in order to receive this right. First, a case must invoke a similar
claim that would have triggered a trial by jury in 1791. More modern cases that
would not have been possibly argued in 1791 must at least share some similar
values. Secondly, the case must only be brought into federal court. The seventh
amendment is actually one of the few original amendments not affected by the
fourteenth amendment’s due process of law and its selective incorporation.
Thirdly, the claim must be a charge of a greater sum than twenty dollars. And
fourthly, the claim must be legal by nature—meaning, it must be a case
involving “monetary damages” versus a case regarding simply ethical justice.
The second clause, otherwise known as the “Reexamination Clause,” deals with
the process of reexamining a case under separate juries. Unless a case was
settled under an unjust or corrupt jury, it cannot be tried under a different
one.
The seventh amendment ultimately protects the
accused from an all-powerful judge. With the protection of unbiased
individuals, members of the general public, the accused can be ensured a fair
trial resulting in a fair verdict. The jury is generally considered to be
triers of fact, whereas judges are generally considered to be known as tiers of
law. As triers of fact, they have the power of the ultimate verdict. And with
the protection of an unbiased verdict, the accused can be ensured a fair
opportunity to just consequences.
