Not under the current system of selection of jurors. Both lawyers will reject you if you claim to know anything about this subject. There will be always plenty of low IQ candidates from which to select. Why not if they are "educating" them in public schools.
If an activist tries to educate jurors within the court building s/he may be arrested for "interfering" with them. Judges know more laws than a normal person does, and they can apply them on the spot. If some laws are unconstitutional ... the activist will be free to challenge them from behind the bars.
The reason is that the bosses of the current system of [in]justice want it this way, and they have all the power to enforce their preferences. Today the justice system is a world in itself, with its own High Priests, soldiers, and other servants. They have their own language, their own power, their own "sacred books," and they can imprison anyone at will - just as it happened in this story.
Getting the issue to go viral at a grass roots level will be the only thing that helps.
“Both lawyers will reject you if you claim to know anything about this subject.”
And I’m guessing that responses during voir dire are given under oath, so that anyone claiming no knowledge could be prosecuted for perjury.