I'll say something similar I said in a post yesterday to a member who was told he couldn't wear pants to work at the bank. I mentioned that some areas of society are always going to require the societal norm because it projects an air of stability and predictability; it's a psychological thing. At a bank it's supposed to be a subtle message linking the idea that dressing conservatively suggests that they're going to be responsible with your money.

In this case, as a juror on a trial, it suggests that you aren't someone who will take the matter lightly; that you don't flaunt the rules or buck the trend or whatever, and your choice of dress indicates a level of seriousness which means you can be trusted to reach a sound decision that will affect someone else's life.

Now, I know this is just a class, not real. I'm quite certain that you are an intelligent guy who would take the matter seriously if you wore a ball gown. But remember that in certain instances, others' perceptions of you carry a lot of weight, even if it sucks.

Now it sounds like the teacher was out of line in how he told you and in the reasons he gave. A kilt with a nice jacket and tie looks plenty conservative, in the right place. But an American court of law ain't it. If you're willing to accept the consequences of wearing the kilt, by all means do it. If you think it's not worth it, wear the kilt to school, change into pants for the trial, and change back after. Part of life is knowing that the right choice still sometimes comes with crappy side effects. Whatever decision you make, own it! Good luck.