Does this practice substantially violate the plain language of the Jury Act under 28 U.S.C. § 1861, and was the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals wrong to decide that the codefendants' motion under the act was untimely?

QUESTION PRESENTED Patrick Eugene Stein along with codefendants Curtis Allen and Gavin Wright were tried in a weeks-long jury trial in the District of Kansas that resulted in Mr. Stein being convicted for (1) conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, 18 U.S.C. § 2332a(a)(2), and (2) conspiracy against civil rights, 18 U.S.C. § 241. The Jury Act provides that “all citizens shall have the opportunity to be considered for service on grand and petit juries in the district courts of the United States.” 28 U.S.C. § 1861. And yet, as the District Court found, citizens residing in over half of Kansas (the unshaded regions on the map below) were excluded from jury service at the time that the codefendants’ trial took place. —(—|—l—| ben | mm | on Does this practice substantially violate the plain language of the Jury Act under 28 U.S.C. § 1861, and was the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals wrong to decide that the codefendants’ motion under the act was untimely? 1