This was a standard courtroom policy, until the labor disputes by miners in the early 20th century. The .gov got tired of juries tossing out charges against the miners, so judges were instructed to stop advising juries about nullification. They also made it a crime for a lawyer to mention it in court.
@Will: And now judges keep trying to make it a crime to mention it outside of the court, too.
Nullification of unjust laws – even if a law is unjust only when applied in that one particular case, and only nullified that one time – is the entire reason behind the right to a jury trial.
Also worth noting (as the linked article does), the NH Supreme Court has previously said that any law allowing jury nullification would violate the state constitution, so any law allowing juries to be instructed about it would also be unconstitutional.
So, sadly, even if this bill passes it’s pretty much DOA.
March 14th, 2016 at 10:24 pm
Be careful what you wish for.
March 15th, 2016 at 7:11 am
This was a standard courtroom policy, until the labor disputes by miners in the early 20th century. The .gov got tired of juries tossing out charges against the miners, so judges were instructed to stop advising juries about nullification. They also made it a crime for a lawyer to mention it in court.
March 15th, 2016 at 10:19 am
@Will: And now judges keep trying to make it a crime to mention it outside of the court, too.
Nullification of unjust laws – even if a law is unjust only when applied in that one particular case, and only nullified that one time – is the entire reason behind the right to a jury trial.
March 15th, 2016 at 10:30 am
Also worth noting (as the linked article does), the NH Supreme Court has previously said that any law allowing jury nullification would violate the state constitution, so any law allowing juries to be instructed about it would also be unconstitutional.
So, sadly, even if this bill passes it’s pretty much DOA.