After the Lindsay Clancy murder trial ended in a mistrial, jurors who served on the case were identified and at least one received threats, according to the judge overseeing it. In a court filing, Judge William Sullivan cited "identifications of jurors and their personal information without their permission" and "threats made to at least one juror" as reasons to seal the names of everyone called for jury duty.

Jurors who served on Karen Read's two trials have described the same fear. One told local reporters, "I definitely didn't want to deal with the backlash more so for my family," and added, "Juror safety is paramount if we want our legal and trial system to continue to work." Another said they left home for several days after bloggers showed up looking for them.

Jury duty isn't optional. People are required by law to serve, often on cases that draw intense public attention and strong opinions on every side. But right now, protections for jurors vary case by case and depend entirely on whether an individual judge decides to act. Once a juror's identity becomes public, courts have no way to undo the exposure, and no way to guarantee that juror's safety.

If jurors can be tracked down, named online, and threatened for doing a legal duty, fewer people will be willing to serve, and the ones who do may vote based on fear of public backlash rather than the evidence in front of them. That threatens the fairness of every trial that follows.

State courts should adopt clear, consistent rules protecting juror identities in high-profile cases, both during trial and after a verdict, with real consequences for anyone who deliberately exposes or threatens a juror. Sign the petition to demand stronger juror protections now, before another juror is put in danger for simply doing their civic duty.