quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Those who have endorsed the right of a jury to judge both the law and the facts include Chief Justice John Jay, Samuel Chase, Dean Roscoe Pound, Learned Hand and Oliver Wendell Holmes. According to the Yale Law Journal in 1964, during the first third of the 19th century judges did inform juries of the right, forcing lawyers to argue "the law -- its interpretation and validity -- to the jury." By the latter part of the century, however, judges and state law were increasingly moving against nullification. In 1895 the US Supreme Court upheld the principle but ruled that juries were not to be informed of it by defense attorneys, nor were judges required to tell them about it. Stephen Barkan, writing in Social Problems (October 1983), noted that the attacks on nullification stemmed in part from juries acquitting strike organizers and other labor activists. And in 1892 the American Bar Review warned that jurors had "developed agrarian tendencies of an alarming character."

Today, the constitutions of only two states -- Maryland and Indiana -- clearly declare the nullification right, although two others -- Georgia and Oregon -- refer to it obliquely. The informed jury movement would like all states to require that judges instruct juries on their power to serve, in effect, as the final legislature of the land concerning the law in a particular case.

http://prorev.com/juries.htm

Ya know, as ignorant as you believe me to be, even I know about nullification. Maybe you should get out there, inform citizens, run for office... this is your issue! You can run on this platform!!

quote:

Today, the constitutions of only two states -- Maryland and Indiana -- clearly declare the nullification right,

quote:


So come on legislator taz, last call, once you wrote your bill what is the very first thing you are going to do with it? If you duck it again I will be forced to tell you what you will do with it.