Jury nullification, anyone?

Great Debates
141

I didn’t think to ask if he favors an instruction on jury nullification until I got home today. He didn’t specifically menton it either way in the article. I’ll ask him, but I’m afraid I won’t get the chance to until next week. My gut instinct is no, although I can’t say exactly why. He certainly wouldn’t couch it in terms of “it’s okay to ignore the law”; I don’t think that’s how he views it.

You’d never have to worry about him not applying the law to your case correctly, at any rate; to him the general verdict is the unique power of the jury alone as representatives of the public, not the judge, who is part of the government. He gets reversed on points of law from time to time, but he has as much respect for the rule of law as any judge on the federal bench and probably enjoys the best reputation in the Southern District among trial lawyers as the trial judge you’d want to appear in front of. He just has some very strong views on the role of the jury and the power of the general verdict.

142

In which case I’d almost certainly enjoy practicing before your judge. I have a lot of respect for the common sense of properly-instructed juries. If you go into appellate practice, the best advice I can give you is to focus on the judge, not the jury.

143

The key element in this debate is not what juries may do, but what, if anything, they should be instructed regarding disregarding the law. Like minty, I’d be curious to hear if your federal judge supports the giving of a nullification instruction, and like you, I rather suspect he does not.

  • Rick