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 18, 2026 4:31 PM

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
Why It’s Time to Defend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act
Before I try to convince you that Katha Pollitt is dangerously wrong, let me attempt to explain why her opinion is significant. Pollitt was educated at Harvard and the Columbia School of the Arts and has taught at Princeton. She has won a National Magazine Award for Columns and Commentary, an NEA grant, a Guggenheim Fellowship, and a National Book Critics Circle Award. She is, in other words, the kind of politically progressive pundit whose opinions, when originally expressed, are...
The Importance of Freedom of the Church
The first kind of religious freedom to appear in the Western world was “freedom of the church.” Although that freedom has been all but ignored by the Courts in the past few decades, its place in American jurisprudence is once again being recognized. Notre Dame law professor Richard Garnett explains how we should think about and defend the liberty of religious institutions: To embrace this idea as still-relevant is to claim that religious institutions have a distinctive place in our...
Wilhelm Röpke: An Economist for Our Time
Wilhelm Röpke is one of the most important 20th century economists that almost no Americans know anything about. Fortunately, that may soon change asRöpke’s classicworkon economics,A Humane Economy,is being republished by ISI Books with an introduction by Samuel Gregg,director of research at the Acton Institute. Intercollegiate Review has posted an excerpt from Gregg’s introduction: The current world crisis could never have grown to such proportions, nor proved as stubborn, if it had not been for the many forces at work...
ISIS Actively ‘Recruits’ Girls And Women Online
In an ugly twist on the world of online dating scams, ISIS (the Islamic terrorist group responsible for much evil in places like Syria and Iraq) is now actively recruiting girls and women in the West to join their cause. Jamie Detmer reports that ISIS is now using social media to seek out females who want to join the cause, mainly by stressing the domestic life that supports it. The propaganda usually eschews the gore and barbaric images often included...
Rev. Robert Sirico: ‘Hobby Lobby’s Liberty, and Ours’
on concerns about liberty in the U.S., spurred on by the recent Supreme Court ruling regarding Hobby Lobby and the HHS mandate. Sirico wonders why we are spending so much time legally defending what has always been a “given” in American life: religion liberty. While the Hobby Lobby ruling is seen as a victory for religious liberty, Sirico is guarded about where we stand. Many celebrated the Supreme Court’s June 30 ruling on Hobby Lobby. But let’s not get ahead...
U.S. Supreme Court Reverses Autocam Ruling
A few weeks ago, Hobby Lobby made waves when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the arts and crafts chain in its lawsuit against the Health and Human Services Contraception Mandate. West Michigan manufacturer, Autocam, has been engaged in a similar legal fight. John Kennedy, owner of Autocam, stated that his and his family’s Roman Catholic faith “is integral to Autocam’s corporate culture” and the Affordable Care Act’s requirement to provide contraceptives andabortifacients was a violation of their...
Defining Social Justice
What is social justice? How should Christians advocate an effectual social justice rooted in Gospel and natural law? The Institute for Religion and Democracy is hosting a blog symposium in which millennial Christians examine those and other questions related to social justice. In their first entry, Acton’s Dylan Pahman attempts to define social justice: The term social justice, for many Christians today, e to be synonymous with correcting economic inequalities (usually through the apparatus of the state) out of solidarity...
Revising American History For Our Best And Brightest Students
What do these things have mon: Gloria Steinem, Yiddish theater, Gospel of Wealth, U.S. Fish Commission, the cult of domesticity and smallpox? They are all highlights of American history for Advanced Placement (AP) high school students. AP classes are typically for college-bound students, and considered to be “tougher” classes. The College Board administers AP classes in high schools, and is releasing its American history framework effective this fall. Here are some things students won’t see: the Founding Fathers, Abraham Lincoln...
Human Trafficking To Blame For Surge Of Children At U.S. Border, Says Bishop
Bishop Romulo Emiliani Sanchez says the lies and lures of human traffickers are the root cause of the surge of illegal immigrant children at the U.S. southern border. Emiliani, an auxiliary of the Catholic Diocese of San Pedro Sula in Honduras, decried the tactics of organized crime and human traffickers for tricking parents and children into thinking that a warm e and easier life awaits them in the U.S. It is unfortunate that the illusion and mirage that the U.S....
Social Justice: ‘Checking on my Privilege’
Peter Johnson, External Relations Officer at Acton, recently wrote an article for the Institute for Religion and Democracy’s series mentaries on social justice. This series explains what social justice is and examines what it means for Christians in light of the Gospel and natural law. Acton’s Dylan Pahman wrote the first article in this series by defining social justice. Johnson’s piece, Checking On My Privilege (And, Yes, It’s Still There) is the second in the series: The suggestion that the...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved