Well, you could not have made a better case for the lunacy of the 9th Circuit. It does change the whole concept of the separation of powers. I think we can actually improve on that somewhat. Let's take the Executive Branch for example. If it's alright for a judge to rule with his conscience, why shouldn't a government official be able to do the same? If he finds the law morally objectionable, merely ignore it! As I've said before, another name for that is anarchy.
to judge the justice of the law, and to hold all laws invalid, that are, in their opinion, unjust or oppressive, and all persons guiltless in violating, or resisting the execution of, such law.
As I indicated earlier, no true conservative could possibly support such nonsense. Jury nullification of course freed OJ from an obvious murder. For about a hundred years after the Civil War, it was used to free KKK members charged with a host of crimes not limited to murder. By Spooner's definition, almost anyone could be freed by looking at the "justice" of the law itself and the moral intent of the perp. Almost every environmental crime involves someone whose moral intent could be considered consistent with a social justice agenda. Even the suicide bombers have a social justice agenda.
In modern times, I'm not aware of many attempts to "guide" a jury in this direction, even by the defense, as it would be disallowed by the judge. A juror takes an oath just as anyone else involved in the legal system. Just as I've said before, if a juror cannot deal with the broken law itself, say so. He has no right to lie about it and sneak onto the jury just to do his own personal damage to the legal system.
So far, what I think you propose is that our Constitution and our framework of federal and state statutes are meaningful only if judges, officials, jurors, etc feel like supporting them. Otherwise, no one has any particular legal or moral responsibility to anything other than his own conscience. Perhaps it's time to get away from that pesky oath:
To protect and defend the Constitution of the United States, So help me God.
You advocate a modernist perversion of the common law justice system, that is designed to benefit the overarching state at the expense of individual freedom. Youi may be correct that given our cultural decline, it will not work like it worked for hundreds of years in the Anglosphere. Which is why Europe is dying, and we are not far behind. Constitutionalist robotics will not save us.