On jury nullification

I'm not going to try to do an exhaustive treatise on jury nullification, but I'll try to make a couple of points.

Say Uncle (among others) pointed to a speed bump in Missoula, MT. Commenter RonW posts a few of the more poignant quotes by the judiciary regarding jury nullification. Go. Read. I'll wait.

The subject of jury nullification is guaranteed to get a mistrial declared in most courts in the country, and it's my opinion that that's dead wrong.

Thomas Jefferson was (at least nominally) in favor of routine rebellion in our fledgling country, with most of his pertinent views coming in letters he wrote during the Whiskey Rebellions. His letter to James Madison pretty succinctly lays out his feelings:

I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccessful rebellions, indeed, generally establish the encroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government.

The first sentence is well-known, but if you read further, you'll note that Jefferson believes that honest folks in the government will not punish rebels harshly, but with understanding.

Jury nullification is the last step in this process. If dishonest government officials try to overstep their bounds, the jury is there to say 'No. Maybe you should have thought about the consequences of your legislative actions. Let this be a lesson to you.' There's a reason the jury is supposed to be one of your peers.

And this system is so elegant and simple that it's puzzling why we should have abandoned it.

pm