3 ms·
> But what would we do if all those legal and technical experts came up with a framework that the general population believed was obviously unfair? Vote for ne
by joshuamorton 6y ago
> But what would we do if all those legal and technical experts came up with a framework that the general population believed was obviously unfair?
Vote for new representatives to change the laws.
Technically speaking, as a jurist you aren't supposed to make a decision based on fairness instead of the law, and if you state that you will, you will be removed from the jury or held in contempt. Jury nullification, which you're suggesting as a strategy, isn't intended to be legal, its just unpunishable.
- mullingitover 6y ago> Jury nullification, which you're suggesting as a strategy, isn't intended to be legal, its just unpunishable. It's ironic that the whole point of the jury system is to enable jury nullification, and yet those are the magic words that will immediately get you out of jury duty. I wish there was a simple checkmark on the jury summons form that says "I know what jury nullification is and intend to use it," it would save everyone a lot of time.
- CPLX 6y agoUnpublishable is a strange description for a concept that was intentionally made the core feature for the system. Having a jury means that political leaders can’t, on an ongoing basis, have courts make decisions that the general population disagrees with. That’s literally the point.
- mullingitover 6y agoTrying to figure out why we don't have a jury pool for the Supreme Court in that case.