I’m sure everyone here is familiar with the saying regarding the “four boxes” of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. I’ve been thinking a lot about number 3 and how it’s an under-utilized way to check government power. In fact, I think it might even be the best way. I’m specifically talking about the idea of jury nullification. The refusal of one’s peers to convict a fellow citizen if the law is unjust or the government abused its powers.
Obviously, the government doesn’t like this and is going everything it can to keep the idea from spreading, including dismissing from jury duty those who would question the law and arresting those who would distribute leaflets on jury rights. (I’ll edit this later with links).
I’m curious as to what others would do. If advocacy is ineffective and you’ve failed at the ballot box, to what extent should the jury box be used? Personally, absent violence, I’m not voting to convict someone on a drug possession charge. You can go beyond the war on drugs too. Prosecutors are bringing wire-tapping and related charges against those who record police officers. The only way around that, as I see it, is a string of acquittals, as no politician is going to run on a platform that is perceived to be “soft” on crime.
See more at Fully Informed Jury Association.
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: Jury rights | 17 Comments »