Consistent with growing interest in bona fide groups and taking a structurational approach to members' appropriation of rules for decision making, this study was an investigation of potential jurors' intuitive rules for deliberation. Following a summary, critique, and reconceptualization of jury research, we discuss five communicative challenges juries face in the course of their deliberations (selecting a leader, agreeing on voting procedures, determining whether to request assistance from the court, reporting member misconduct, and handling disagreement about whether to continue deliberating) and report results of a content analysis reflecting the rules invoked for each of these situations by 97 citizens summoned for jury duty and waiting for jury service at a courthouse in a judicial district in the western United States.