Hello! I've been down a rabbithole on Aristotlean thought about democracy and the academic who introduced me to the topic off-handedly used the phrase "juries without judges" (or something to that effect). And my interpretation of this was basically a system of courts by sortition-based tribunal. And ever since my mind has been overrun with ideas about how such a concept might be acted upon: would it be a stratified sampling; would there be further selection akin to American "voir dire"; how many people should make up a tribunal; are they selected for a term or per trial; should they have full power as adjudicators; what might the authority of legal representation; what would be the process of appeal?

With all these questions, I naturally sought out some sort of historical implementation or something adjacent to it. As of yet, the closest I have come is this rather niche movement to have sortition for the United States Supreme Court. It's far more modest in its aims—it proposes existing circuit judges are randomly selected for one year of cases. It's a genuinely refreshing idea in the blatantly partisan state of the SCOTUS at present, ro be sure.