Jury selection is one of the most critical stages of any trial. In Massachusetts District Court, Standing Order 1-18 (Voir Dire Protocol) sets a clear, flexible framework that balances efficiency, juror dignity, and the parties’ right to uncover bias—both explicit and implicit.
The order begins with a strong principle: the trial judge retains broad discretion over the method of examining and selecting jurors, provided the process protects privacy, identifies bias, and keeps sessions running smoothly. Attorneys and self-represented parties are given a fair opportunity to participate through individual voir dire, panel voir dire, or a combination of both.
Parties must submit written requests for attorney- or party-conducted voir dire no later than five business days before trial (or earlier if required by a civil trial order). These filings should cover proposed questions, preliminary legal instructions, courtroom logistics, and any motions in limine related to jury selection. When extensive participation is sought, a pretrial hearing is advisable so the judge can resolve procedural details in advance.
The judge must allow reasonable follow-up questions and a limited number of inquiries into a prospective juror’s background, experiences, potential biases, and ability to apply the law as instructed. However, certain topics are strictly off-limits: questions that ask how a juror would decide the specific case, that attempt to commit the juror to a particular result, that merely argue the case, that probe prior jury service outcomes, or that publicly reference confidential questionnaire answers. Political views and religious beliefs are disfavored and require prior judicial approval with a clear showing of relevance.
Individual voir dire is required when private or embarrassing information is at issue, when questionnaire answers are discussed, or when accommodations for hearing, vision, language, or other needs must be explored. Challenges for cause and peremptory challenges may be timed at the judge’s discretion, and counsel must carefully preserve the record by identifying jurors by seat or number during panel questioning.
In short, Standing Order 1-18 promotes thoughtful, controlled participation in jury selection while safeguarding the integrity of the process. Lawyers who prepare early, frame focused questions, and respect the prohibited categories will find the protocol a useful tool rather than an obstacle.