Comment on YSK about Jury Nullification, if you're an American and you don't, look it up.
prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 days agoThis is really important. You can disagree with laws, but that feels like a terrible reason to nullify a legitimate guilty decision.
And what if the law is “trans people should not exist”?
CuriousRefugee@lemmy.ml 2 days ago
Okay, that’s fair. I was thinking more along the lines of when the law is questionable, not patently unjust , as you put it.
And Jim Crow laws are a good example, as are sodomy laws that essentially outlawed gay relationships for a long time in many states (struck down by Lawrence v. Texas, but not until 2003!). Usually when people think of jury nullification (outside of the more recent obvious case), they’re thinking along the lines of drug laws, which are often grey. Both of those examples probably DO warrant nullification.
That being said, I think it’s unlikely that a case which can get 9 jurors to oppose it based on an unjust law would occur in a state where that law exists. Those sodomy laws I referenced were mostly only present in conservative states by 2003. However, federal laws might be more susceptible, as a state that’s the opposite political ideology of the current US government could have a jury like that.
But I’ll concede the point that atrociously immoral or unjust laws could and should be targets for jury nullification. It’s a good addition.