Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Still Thinking
Take it up with the founders. I tend to agree with them, but I think they were a lot smarter than I.

How many of the founders believed in jury nullification? One? Two?

Why isn't it in the Constitution?

Why have laws at all, if the jury is smart enough to deal "justice" on their own? Why bother with legislation, voting, etc. Why not just call on 12 people to administer "justice" in every case?

20 posted on 04/28/2010 11:35:56 AM PDT by TChris ("Hello", the politician lied.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: TChris

From what I’ve read, that was the purpose of having a jury based system (which if true means it is in the Constitution by implication). I’ve seen quotes that presumed it was common knowledge that this was the expected behavior for jurors.

In fact SCOTUS has explicitly approved nullification itself, though they ruled that as the masters of the government it was the citizen-jurors’ obligation to know what their rights and duties as jurors are, and not the court’s obligation to inform them. If I get a second, I’ll try and look up the case. I think it was in the late 1800’s.


21 posted on 04/28/2010 11:45:03 AM PDT by Still Thinking (Freedom is NOT a loophole!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson