The near-term future of citizen juries is not a single big invention but a drift toward standardization and hybridization. Expect more “jury-like” processes to be embedded inside ongoing governance: repeated juries feeding standing committees, juries convened as oversight for public algorithms and procurement, and juries used as legitimacy checkpoints for controversial infrastructure or health decisions. epa.gov 
A second future trend is networked juries and stacked designs. Instead of one jury, multiple small juries can run in parallel (or sequentially) and then be synthesized, borrowing from the scaling logic seen in some Planning Cells practice and modern deliberative systems design. This is how you keep the “small group depth” of a jury while increasing coverage and representativeness at scale.
A third future trend is stronger linkage to power. Citizen juries are often criticized as “advisory theatre” if decision-makers can ignore the verdict with no consequence. The future-shaping question is not whether the jury can deliberate, but what commitments are made up front: response obligations, publication requirements, audit trails explaining divergence, and institutional hooks that turn a jury verdict into a real constraint on policy behavior.