Nancy S. Marder

Professor of Law, Director of the Justice John Paul Stevens Jury Center, Co-Director of the Institute for Law and the Humanities

Professor Nancy Marder is a nationally and internationally recognized expert on the jury. Her most recent book, The Power of the Jury: Transforming Citizens into Jurors, was published by Cambridge University Press in September 2022. Her book provides a new understanding of how the several stages of the jury process transform a group of reluctant citizens into a jury capable of and ready to reach a just verdict.

This latest book is the culmination of a lifetime of work as a jury scholar. Professor Marder has presented her work at 175 conferences in the United States and around the world. Her audiences have included legal scholars, academics from a variety of disciplines, judges, lawyers, and other practitioners, and her presentations have ranged from panel discussions to keynote speeches.

Professor Marder’s books also include Juries, Mixed Courts, and Lay Judges: A Global Perspective, for which she was a co-editor and that was published by Cambridge University Press in 2021. This book focuses on juries and lay participation in many countries across the globe. Professor Marder was also the author of The Jury Process published by Foundation Press. Her scholarly articles have appeared in such law reviews as Northwestern University Law Review, Iowa Law Review, Texas Law Review, and Southern California Law Review, as well as Yale Law Journal (when she was an articles editor).

To reach a diverse audience of scholars, practitioners, and citizens around the world who are engaged in creating and strengthening the jury system, Professor Marder has also written numerous book chapters, book reviews, and essays addressing an array of issues of popular interest, such as recent Supreme Court decisions, current jury trials, cameras in the court room, the role of Judge Judy and TV judges, and the movie Twelve Angry Men, among many others. She has appeared on numerous radio programs, such as National Public Radio, and television programs, such as WTTW's “Chicago Tonight,” as she seeks to engage high school students, law students, lawyers, and judges in discussion of these issues.

Professor Marder created and directs the Justice John Paul Stevens Jury Center at Chicago-Kent, which informs scholars, lawyers, law students, and members of the public and press about work on the jury and also undertakes special projects, including five symposia in the Chicago-Kent Law Review: “The Jury at a Crossroad: The American Experience,” “Secrecy in Litigation,” “The 50th Anniversary of 12 Angry Men,” “Comparative Jury Systems,” and “Juries and Lay Participation: American Perspectives and Global Trends.” Through the Stevens Jury Center’s efforts, as led by Professor Marder, the Chicago-Kent Law Review has become one of the leading sources of scholarship on the jury.

Professor Marder named the Jury Center in honor of Justice Stevens for whom she clerked for two Terms.  Prior to clerking for Justice Stevens, she was a law clerk for Judge William A. Norris on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and Judge Leonard B. Sand in the Southern District of New York. Prior to her clerkships, Professor Marder was a litigation associate at the New York law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison.  Professor Marder has a B.A. (summa cum laude) in English and Afro-American Studies from Yale College; a M. Phil. In International Relations from Cambridge University, where she was a Mellon Fellow; and a J.D. from Yale Law School, where she was an articles editor of the Yale Law Journal.

Professor Marder tries to ensure that her scholarship is of use to judges, jurors, and lawyers. As professor/reporter for the Illinois Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions in Civil Cases since 2003, Professor Marder has helped to draft jury instructions for Illinois. She has also drafted jury instructions for the ABA, advocated successfully for rule changes affecting jurors in Illinois, given public testimony for proposed jury reforms, and served as a member on various jury advisory committees.

At Chicago-Kent, Professor Marder teaches required first-year courses such as Legislation and Civil Procedure, as well as upper-level electives including Juries, Judges, and Trials and Law, Literature, and Feminism.


J.D., Yale Law School
M.Phil., University of Cambridge
B.A., Yale University



Foster v. Chatman: A Missed Opportunity for Batson and the Peremptory Challenge, 49 Connecticut Law Review 1137 (2017).

The Supreme Court's Transparency: Myth or Reality?, 32 Georgia State University Law Review 849 (2016).

Jurors and Social Media: Is a Fair Trial Still Possible?, 67 S.M.U. Law Review 617 (2014).

Batson Revisited, 97Iowa Law Review 1585 (2012).

Bringing Jury Instructions Into the Twenty-First Century, 81 Notre Dame Law Review 449 (2006).

Juries, Justice and Multiculturalism, 75 Southern California Law Review659 (2002).

The Myth of the Nullifying Jury, 93Northwestern University Law Review 877 (1999).

Beyond Gender: Peremptory Challenges and the Roles of the Jury, 73 Texas Law Review 1041 (1995).


What Do Prosecutors Think about Batson?, 82 Ohio State Law Review Online 83 (2021).

Jury Nullification:  Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?, 17 Journal of Law, Culture, and Humanities 404 (2021).

Juries in Film and Television, Oxford Research Encyclopedias: Criminology and Criminal Justice (H.N. Pontell eds., Oxford University Press 2018).

Justice Stevens’ Jurisprudence of Respect, 44 Loyola (L.A.) Law Review 843 (2011).

Cameras in the Courtroom: An Ill-Advised Policy, 47 Litigation 18 (2021).

Reminiscences of Justice Stevens by His Law Clerks:  Three Lessons Learned, 94 Judicature 10 (2010).

Courtroom Technology: The Technological Juror, Judges’ Journal, Fall 2001, at 35.

Search Professor Marder's publications on


The Power of the Jury: Transforming Citizens into Jurors (Cambridge University Press, 2022).

Juries, Lay Judges, and Mixed Courts: A Global Perspective (Sanja Kutnjak Ivković, Shari Seidman Diamond, Valerie P. Hans & Nancy S. Marder eds., Cambridge University Press, 2021).

The Jury Process (Foundation Press, 2005).

Book chapters

What Hollywood, U.S.A. Teaches the World (incorrectly and Correctly) about Juries, in Juries, Lay Judges, and Mixed Courts: A Global Perspective (Ivković, Diamond, Hans & Marder eds. 2021).

Jurors and Juries, in The Handbook of Law and Society (Austin Sarat & Patricia Ewing eds., 2015).

Recollections of a Stevens Clerk, in Of Courtiers and Kings:  More Stories of Supreme Court Law Clerks and Their Justices (Todd C. Peppers & Clare Cushman eds., 2015).

Judging Reality Television Judges, in Law and Justice on the Small Screen (Peter Robson & Jessica Silbey eds., 2012).

Instructing the Jury, The Oxford Handbook of Language and Law (Lawrence Solan & Peter Tiersma eds., 2012).

Judging Judge Judy, in Lawyers in Your Living Room!  Law on Television (Michael Asimow ed., 2009).


Courts and Judges; Gender and Sexuality and the Law; Juries; Legislation; US Supreme Court

Related Links

The Justice John Paul Stevens Jury Center

Institute for Law and the Humanities

IIT Magazine article about Professor Marder: "United We Serve"


Media Appearances

Nancy Marder, Director of Justice John Paul Stevens Jury Center, Says Question About Impartiality Allowed Potential Trump Jurors to Opt Out

“In some cases it could be that some prospective jurors do not want to sit on a six-week jury trial that will be in the public eye,” said Nancy S. Marder, jury expert professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law. “They might have such strong feelings because the defendant is in the public eye. Or, it might be that New Yorkers are not afraid to express their strongly held views. But in either case, this is exactly what should happen.”

Washington Post

Chicago-Kent Law Professor Nancy Marder Dispels Myths on Removing Jurors in Trump Trial

There are two paths by which prosecution and defense may seek to remove or strike prospective jurors. The first is “for cause,” which means for a stated and qualified reason such as bias. The second is "peremptory," which means the prosecution or defense doesn’t need to give a reason, said Nancy S. Marder, a jury scholar and professor at Chicago-Kent College of Law. The cause strikes are unlimited, but the peremptory strikes for each side are capped based on the level of felony charges in this case. In Trump’s trial, they’re set at 10 for each side of the regular jurors.