SB2122, the Jury ACCESS Act of 2025, would amend title 28 of the United States Code to prohibit excluding individuals from serving on federal juries on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The bill adds the terms “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” to the disqualification triggers in 28 U.S.C. 1862.
The short title is established as the Jury ACCESS Act of 2025. The text is narrowly focused on preventing identity-based exclusions from federal jury service and does not spell out enforcement mechanisms or penalties.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill amends 28 U.S.C. 1862 by inserting “sexual orientation, gender identity” after “sex,” thereby prohibiting exclusion from federal jury service on those bases.
Who It Affects
Federal court juror pools and the staff who manage jury selection across districts; potential jurors in federal cases.
Why It Matters
It advances nondiscrimination in federal jury eligibility and aims to improve representativeness and legitimacy of federal juries.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
SB2122 is a concise federal bill that changes who cannot be excluded from serving on federal juries. Specifically, it amends 28 U.S.C. 1862 to add sexual orientation and gender identity to the list of characteristics that cannot be used to disqualify someone from jury service.
The bill also provides a formal short title—the Jury ACCESS Act of 2025.
The practical effect is straightforward: individuals cannot be removed from consideration for federal juries solely because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. The text confines itself to this prohibition and does not establish new penalties or a concrete enforcement scheme within the bill as written.
Implementation would rely on existing jury-selection processes to apply the updated standard across federal districts.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill adds sexual orientation and gender identity to disqualification criteria in 28 U.S.C. 1862.
Exclusion from federal juries cannot be based on these attributes under the act.
No explicit enforcement mechanism or penalties are described in the bill text.
The measure applies to federal jury service only; it does not address state or local juries.
A short title is established: the Jury ACCESS Act of 2025.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short Title
This section designates the act’s formal citation as the Jury ACCESS Act of 2025. It simply names the bill for reference and does not alter any substantive rights or obligations.
Prohibition on exclusion from federal juries based on sexual orientation or gender identity
This section amends 28 U.S.C. 1862 by inserting ‘sexual orientation, gender identity’ after ‘sex.’ The practical effect is a prohibition on excluding individuals from federal jury service for these attributes. The text confines its scope to federal juries and does not specify penalties, remedies, or enforcement procedures beyond the statutory prohibition.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- LGBTQ+ individuals who could have been disqualified from federal jury service due to bias or misapplication of existing rules.
- Federal district court juror pools in districts with sizable LGBTQ+ populations, whose diversity could improve representativeness.
- Criminal and civil defendants in federal cases who benefit from more representative juries and perceived fairness in outcomes.
- Federal courts and jury administrators responsible for ensuring compliance and updating screening practices to reflect the new standard.
- Federal jurors and the public who gain legitimacy from inclusive, non-discriminatory jury selection.
Who Bears the Cost
- Jury administration offices, which will need to update screening materials, training, and procedures to reflect the new rule.
- Costs associated with implementing and auditing changes to jury-selection processes across districts.
- Potential transitional administrative burden as courts align practice with the amended standard.
- Legal staff time and resources required to interpret and apply the new prohibition in varied district contexts.
- Possible short-term uncertainty or disputes over interpretation before practice becomes settled.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
Balancing inclusive jury service with practical, uniform administration: expanding non-discrimination on sexual orientation and gender identity while maintaining efficient, defensible jury-selection processes across diverse districts.
The act takes a narrow approach: it strengthens anti-discrimination in jury selection by adding two attributes to protected categories. This strengthens inclusivity and could improve the representativeness of federal juries.
However, even with a clear prohibition, actual implementation depends on how jury administrators train staff, revise screening materials, and monitor compliance across districts with differing demographics. The text does not specify penalties, remedies, or enforcement mechanisms beyond the prohibition, so courts will rely on existing disciplinary and administrative channels to address violations.
A core tension is between expanding equal protection in jury service and preserving efficient, consistent jury selection across the federal system. Operationally, districts with large LGBTQ+ populations may need to adjust screening and records handling, while ensuring that disqualifications remain grounded in legitimate legal criteria other than sexual orientation or gender identity.
The bill’s brevity leaves unresolved questions about how to handle ambiguous cases, data collection for compliance, and potential interplays with other disqualification grounds.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.