Here I go about to contradict myself — On the one hand, I really love the Constitution. Best document ever. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s perfect.
One example: The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is crucial. Is the Second Amnendment perfectly worded? I would say that it is not, which allowed some people to push about a million infringements on us, in contravention to the intent of the Constitution.
A jury of our peers? It’s a really nice idea. But that’s why OJ was found innocent. Black people on the jury were just not going to convict OJ. Can Donald Trump or his associates get a fair trial in Washington DC? Not a chance. The juries in that location will find him guilty before the trial even starts.
I think an AI jury would be superior to what the Constitution requires. With the caveat (as I stated in my first post) that a human judge should provide a second layer of judgment and if the human wants to prove that the AI system was poorly programmed and thus improperly biased, they are welcome to try.