Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Explainer: Everything You Ever Needed to Know About Grand Juries
Explainer: Everything You Ever Needed to Know About Grand Juries
Jan 9, 2026 9:03 AM

By the end of this month, a grand jury is expected to hand down a decision in the case of the shooting of Michael Brown by police officer Darren Wilson in Ferguson, Missouri. One ofthe most frequently considered questions related to the case is, “What exactly is a grand jury?”

Although seemingly shrouded in mystery, grand juries are an essential part of the protections of our liberties within the legal system of the United States. Here is everything you ever needed to know about the grand jury system.

(Note: Most of this information is based on federal grand juries. Grand juries at the state level may have slightly different policies.)

What is a grand jury?

The grand jury is a jury of citizens that determines whether there is probable cause to believe that a crime mitted and that a specific person or mitted it. If the grand jury finds probable cause to exist, then it will return a written statement of the charges called an “indictment.”

After the issuance of an indictment, the case moves to trial where the accused can then defend themselves against the charges brought against them before a petit jury (also called a trial jury).

Why are grand juries important?

Grand juries provide an independent, citizen-based check on the power of the government. A grand jury is able to vote an indictment or refuse to do so, as it deems proper, without regard to the mendations of judge, prosecutor, or any other person.

How do grand juries decide whether to indict?

By an examination of the evidence. Members of a grand jury are even allowed to question witnesses directly. All questions asked of each witness must be relevant and proper, relating only to the case under investigation. Witnesses, of course, may invoke the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination and refuse to answer a question.

What does a grand jury determine in indictment?

After hearing all the evidence, the members of the grand jury deliberate and take a vote on whether there is sufficient evidence of probable cause to justify bringing the accused to trial. At least 16 jurors must be present and 12 members must vote in favor of the indictment.

Can a grand jury indict anyone they choose?

No. The grand jury must be called by a prosecuting attorney who must also sign the indictment before the case can move to trial. This ensures a government check on a grand jury’s power.

What happens if the grand jury doesn’t indict?

If the evidence does not persuade the grand jury that there is probable cause to believe the mitted a crime, the grand jury will vote a “no bill,” or “not a true bill.” When this occurs, not trial is required for the accused person.

Who presides over the grand jury?

The prosecuting attorney. No judge or defense attorney is present. The accused also has no right to present their case. In some instances, they may not be informed that an accusation is even being made about them to a grand jury.

How many prise a grand jury?

There are 23 members of a federal grand jury. Sixteen of the 23 members of the grand jury constitute a quorum for the transaction of business. If fewer than this number is present, even for a moment, the proceedings of the grand jury must stop.

How long do grand jurors serve?

In the federal system, regular grand juries sit for a basic term of 18 months, but a court can extend this term for another 6 months, bringing the total possible term to 24 months. Special federal grand juries sit for a basic term of 18 months but a court can extend their term for up to another 18 months, bringing their total possible term to 36 months. The term of state grand juries varies widely, but usually last a year.

Do grand juries meet every day?

No, they usually meet once or twice a week.

Is a grand jury required in all cases?

No. An accused person may waive grand jury proceedings and agree to be prosecuted by a written charge of crime called an “information.”

Must grand jury members explain their decision?

Secrecy is an important element in grand jury proceedings. No inquiry may be made to learn what grand jurors said or how they voted, except upon order of the court.

What is “grand jurors’ immunity”?

Immunity is granted to all grand jurors for their authorized actions while serving on a federal grand jury and means that no grand juror may be penalized for actions taken within the scope of his or her service as a grand juror.

Who is chosen for such duty?

Grand juries are chosen much the same way as trial juries: from registered voters or lists of actual voters, or other sources when necessary, under procedures designed to ensure that all groups in munity will have a fair chance to serve.

Federal law requires that a grand jury be selected at random from a fair cross section of munity in the district or division in which the federal grand jury convenes.

How did grand juries get started?

The tradition of using a grand jury goes back to the Magna Carta, the first English constitutional document, which King John granted in 1215 at the demand of his subjects.

The first English grand jury consisted of twelve men selected from the knights or other freemen, who were summoned to inquire into crimes alleged to have mitted in their munity. Grand jurors originally functioned as accusers or witnesses, rather than as judges.

When the English colonists came to America, they brought with them many of the institutions of the English legal system, including the grand jury. This tradition was so important that it was later added to the Bill of Rights. The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger . . . ”

While all states in the U.S. currently have provisions for grand juries for state-level crimes, only half of the states actually employ them (those states that don’t use grand juries instead use a preliminary hearing before a trial court judge).

Is it true that a prosecutor could, as the old saying goes, “indict a ham sandwich”?

Unclear. There is no record of a federal grand jury ever having indicted an actual ham sandwich.

That famous phrase originated with Sol Wachtler, the former New York State chief judge. In a lunch interview in 1930 with the New York Daily News, Wachtler famously observed that prosecutors have so much control over grand juries that they could convince them to “indict a ham sandwich.”

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
U.S. House unanimously passes bill declaring Islamic State guilty of genocide
UPDATE: (3/17/16) United States: Islamic mitted genocide against Christians, Shi’ites. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry: “The fact is that Daesh kills Christians because they are Christians. Yazidis because they are Yazidis. Shi’ites because they are Shi’ites,” Kerry said, referring to the group by an Arabic acronym, and accusing it of crimes against humanity and of ethnic cleansing. Video of Secretary Kerry giving his statement on the Islamic State is now included at the bottom of this post. ✶✶✶✶✶ In...
Elon Musk on the Problem with Regulators
“Most of economics can be summarized in four words: ‘People respond to incentives,’” says economist Steven E. Landsburg. “The rest mentary.” When governments create a regulation, they are creating an incentive for individuals and businesses to respond in a particular way. But the people who create the regulations —government regulators — also respond to incentives. As Elon Musk, the CEO of Space X and Tesla Motors, explains, There is a fundamental problem with regulators. If a regulator agrees to change...
Video: A Gentleman’s Debate – Distributism vs. Free Markets with Jay Richards and Joseph Pearce
On February 18th, the Acton Institute was pleased to e Jay Richards and Joseph Pearce to our Mark Murray Auditorium for an exchange on two distinct ideas on economics: Distributism vs. Free Markets. The gentleman’s debate was moderated by Acton Institute President Rev. Robert A. Sirico. Joseph Pearce, writer in residence at Aquinas College in Nashville, Tennessee, and Director of the college’s Center for Faith and Culture, argued in favor of distributism; Jay Richards,Assistant Research Professor School of Business and...
To Reduce Human Trafficking, Increase Economic Freedom
Trafficking in persons is estimated to be one of the top-grossing criminal industries in the world (behind illegal drugs and arms trafficking), with traffickers profiting an estimated $32 billion every year. So what can be done to end this scourge? A recent report from the Heritage Foundation mends an oft-overlooked solution: adopting policies that promote economic freedom. A close examination of human trafficking and the principles of economic freedom—especially strong rule of law—reveals the robust connections between these two desirable...
Shareholder Activists Drop Religious Pretext
Religious shareholder activist group As You Sow released its 2016 Proxy Preview last week, and it’s a doozy. Tellingly, AYS has dropped religious faith as a rationale for its climate-change and anti-lobbying efforts. From the panying press release: More 2016 shareholder proposals than ever before address climate change — pared with 82 in 2015. Of the resolutions, 22 ask energy extractors and suppliers to detail how the warming planet will affect their operations and how they will respond if governments...
Explainer: What You Should Know About GMOs and Mandatory Food Labeling
Last year, the House passed a bill to preempt states from imposing mandatory labeling of genetically engineered food (GMOs). But as Daren Bakst notes, “While it looked like the Senate was going to follow suit, in the last minute, the new Senate bill would actually effectively mandate the labeling of genetically engineered food.” “In the Senate bill, there would be a national mandatory labeling requirement unless the Secretary of Agriculture determines that there has been substantial participation by labeled foods...
Is the Government Ever Big Enough?
Can the government ever be too big? How much spending is enough spending? And if there can be too much spending, where is that point? “When was the last time you heard a liberal politician say, ‘Yeah, we solved that social ill. We’re just going to close up that government agency now, zero out the budget and move on to another problem,'” asks William Voegeli, Senior Editor of the Claremont Review of Books. In the video below, Voegeliexplains why our...
Breaking: City of Grand Rapids drops property tax dispute against Acton
Acton Building located in downtown Grand Rapids’ Heartside District A two-year dispute between the Acton Institute and the City of Grand Rapids over the non-profit’s exempt status under state property tax law is over, with Acton emerging the victor. In 2014, the City rejected Acton’s request for a tax exemption on its building, parking areas, and personal property at 98 E. Fulton. Acton purchased the property in 2012 and spent much of the next year renovating the property. An appeal...
Feel the Romantic Bern
“Do voters have a mitment problem’ with Bernie Sanders?” asks Dylan Pahman in this week’s Acton Commentary. So why would someone who seems really to want to be President (unlike candidates who appear to be using their campaigns to promote a book, for example) tell Americans he’s a socialist when half the country says they wouldn’t vote for one? How does that serve his interest? Shouldn’t it hurt his electability? The full text of the essay can be found here....
Audio: Todd Huizinga Talks Global Governance and the New Totalitarian Temptation
Todd Huizinga, Acton’s Director of International Outreach, joined host John J. Miller of National Reviewto discuss his new book,The New Totalitarian Temptation, on the Bookmonger Podcastat Ricochet.They discussed the problems afflicting the European Union, the potential Exit of the UK from the EU, and whether or not the United States faces the same problems with unaccountable government that bedevil Europe. You can listen to the podcast here. If you find the topic interesting, you can join us tomorrow here at...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved