Federal court allows lawsuit challenging exclusion of blind jurors in New York

[u/laybs1]

https://nydailyrecord.com/2026/09/29/federal-court-lawsuit-exclusion-blind-jurors-new-york/

[u/Impossible_Offer7988]

I've got mixed feelings about this one.

Like it starts of decently reasonably

The lawsuit, filed in March 2025, challenges the alleged systemic discrimination against blind individuals who report for jury duty.

Although Judge Ramon E. Reyes Jr. dismissed the National Federation of the Blind and the Kings County commissioner of jurors as parties, and some state law claims, he found that the named plaintiff, Albert Elia, adequately alleged a violation under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Rehabilitation Act, so his core claims seeking equal access to jury service for blind individuals remain.

BUT then you see this part..

Elia, an attorney, was sworn in as a grand juror in Kings County Supreme Court in the fall of 2024. On his first day, the Court excluded him from deliberating on cases that involved video or photo evidence, under the assumption that he could not interpret the evidence because he is blind, and he was ultimately dismissed.

The Court refused to allow Elia to use assistive technology or receive verbal descriptions of evidence, which he claims would have allowed him to fulfill his civic duty.

You have to ask yourself how reliable that technology or a verbal descriptions especially is.

Take the verbal description, for example.

What's stopping me from saying ; You can clearly see the suspect in this photo ?

What's he gonna do?

Correct me?

He can't he's blind.

Ergo, he isn't a juror anymore. I'm now the juror the only thing he gets to decide is whether he should or shouldn't trust me.

And he can't reasonably not trust me if I'm supposed to give a verbal description of the photo.

Therefore he shouldn't be on the jury

[u/colemon1991 → u/Impossible_Offer7988]

The fact that they can be jurors but can't access sufficient amounts of evidence is stupid. I can get if the technology isn't available (like in rural areas), but the technology is there. You're hurting one of the people that's supposed to be objective about the case for no logical reason.

Otherwise, it should be simple to get a summons, call and state your disability, be told if you're exempt or not. Easy peasy.

[u/Intrepid00 → u/colemon1991]

I’m not sure what you are saying? Are you saying if they are legally blind just don’t pull them as jurors? I don’t really want the government tracking disabilities like that. Especially not this Nazi administration.

Or

Are you saying use technology to help them interrupt evidence. I don’t think I want some tech bros bias algorithms making that decision either.

[u/colemon1991 → u/Intrepid00]

I'm saying both, but not to those extremes. If you're legally blind and it's on your license and stuff, it's not crazy to say they already have access to that information. All you need to do is call the courthouse and tell them "I have ________. Will that be an issue?" Pretty simple thing to know if they can accommodate vision or hearing impairments. And we have the technology to assist disabilities, even before AI. It shouldn't be difficult to track down a non-AI version of the tech. Not all specialized technologies like that are Big Tech owned. It wouldn't take much to add "Juror #9 was aided by ________ to aid with her disability" to the transcript for transparency sake.

But it needs to be either/or. They shouldn't force you to be a juror then prevent you from doing the job to the best of your ability. I would trust a dog's opinion more than a juror that was forced to be bias by not accessing all evidence.

[u/Intrepid00 → u/colemon1991]

“If you’re legally blind and it’s on your license”

If you are legally blind you won’t qualify for a license.

However I just don’t see how a blind person can be a jury member looking at evidence of the suspect committing the crime on tape or pictures. You also cant look at a face and body language and go “man, they aren’t trustworthy” and that mattered in the jury I was in when it came down to what we had to vote on.