[Spiff]

Not at all. I was arguing with someone who thinks he ought to be able to decide Constitutionality of a law along with the guilt or innocence of a defendant.

Is justice done when a person is convicted under an unjust law? The intent of our courts is to ensure that justice is done. Everyone in the court - the judge, jury, and attorneys - has the overriding concern that justice is done. Sadly, that idea is lost under mounds and mounds of laws, precedent, corrupt judges and prosecutors, lazy or crooked lawyers, and we the people can no longer find justice. The juror doesn't necessarily decide the constitutionality of a law, he decides among all other things he must consider whether the law being applied is just, whether it is right, and whether justice will be done in the particular situation before him.

[Maelstrom]

Is justice done when a person is convicted under an unjust law?

According to the displayed rhetoric, there are no unjust laws, or there are only laws and no justice.

Nonetheless, your only recourse is to vote...but you can't vote for appointed judges...so there you have it. The US, according to sinkspur.
Never a country founded on the principles and ideals of freedom, but only law, to be ruled over by nine kings in dark robes. The Anti-Federalists were prophetic.