Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in State v. Dangcil, a case in which, as discussed here, the Court granted direct certification from the Law Division and accelerated the matter. The question presented is a particularly important one: “Is the hybrid-virtual jury selection procedure adopted in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, under which certain aspects of the jury selection process are conducted remotely, constitutionally sound?”
For the first time in over a year, the Court heard this case in person rather than remotely. The Court has not issued any order or announcement that oral arguments in general will resume being heard in person, and aside from yesterday’s specially scheduled argument, oral arguments for the current Term are finished. But yesterday’s in-person argument, which involved a number of counsel, is an encouraging step in that direction for the oral arguments that will be scheduled for the fall.