Comment on Why is Jury Nullification a Thing, But You Can’t Talk About It in Court?

<- View Parent
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

You seem to be suggesting that moral considerations are not relevant to legal proceedings, yet simultaneously arguing that jurors should refuse to convict on moral grounds.

This is correct. There is no paradox here; no hypocrisy.

“We The People” empower the constitution. The Constitution empowers the government. The government has only the law; it does not have any sort of moral code. The government cannot consider moral principals in the application of law.

The juror is not a member of the government. The juror is a member of “We The People”; a peer of the accused.

Where the juror is convinced that the legislated law does not appropriately consider the specific circumstance of the accused, the juror is constitutionally permitted to return a “just” verdict, consistent with their own morality.

The jury is NEVER obligated to return an unjust verdict.

source
Sort:hotnewtop