Penn Undergraduate Law Journal
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Masthead
    • Faculty Advisory Board
    • Partner Journals
    • Sponsors
  • Submissions
  • Full Issues
  • The Roundtable
    • Pre-Law Corner
  • Events
  • Contact
    • Contact
    • Apply
    • FAQs

The Roundtable


Welcome to the Roundtable, a forum for incisive commentary and analysis
on cases and developments in law and the legal system.


Ignoring the Law - Is Jury Nullification a Civic Duty or Anarchy?

4/24/2018

1 Comment

 
Picture
By Saxon Bryant
​
Saxon Bryant is a freshman at the University of Pennsylvania and Associate Editor of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal.

When it comes to due process, we have a flawed assumption as to how a trial by jury can proceed. As commonly understood, the two options presented before the jury are guilty or not guilty. The jury is meant to deliberate on the evidence presented during the trial, and based on that reach one of the two aforementioned verdicts. While simple, this choice does not tell the full story. Jurors have another option they can use. This third option is known as jury nullification. But what exactly jury nullification is and whether or not it’s legitimate has been a subject of debate for hundreds of years.

Jury nullification is a jury's knowing and deliberate rejection of the evidence or refusal to apply the law. [1] It occurs when juries render a verdict that is contrary to the evidence and has been a staple of the American judicial and constitutional system for centuries now. The Declaration of Independence gives nullification credence in saying that a government only has legitimate power with “the consent of the governed.” [2] A law which lacks that consent is arguably an improper law. Juries also have a constitutional basis, such as the Sixth Amendment, which grants the accused an inviolable right to a jury determination of his guilt or innocence in all criminal prosecutions. Because of this right, a trial judge absolutely cannot direct a verdict in favor of the State or set aside a jury's verdict of not guilty, "no matter how overwhelming the evidence," as was reaffirmed in Sullivan v. Louisiana (1993). [3] This rule is designed to safeguard what United States v. Spock (1969) defined the jury's power as: intended "to arrive at a general verdict without having to support it by reasons or by a report of its deliberations" and to protect its historic power to nullify or temper rules of law. [4]
Empirically, juries have not been shy to use nullification as a tool for correcting injustices committed by the government. Take the case of John Zenger, who in November of 1734 printed critical articles about the Governor of New York’s corruption. Considered libel at the time, John was brought before the court and, while fully confessing to the crime, argued that due to their truth the articles were not libelous. The jury, despite the fact that Zenger printed the articles being established as fact, went against the instructions of the judge and voted not guilty. [5]

​
Jury nullification was almost prominently used during the 1800s, when northern jurors would acquit charges brought against individuals violating the Fugitive Slave Laws. The Camden 28 are another example of the public outcry fueling jury nullification. On August 22, 1971, this group of 28 students, blue collar workers, clergy, and others broke into a draft board office in Camden, New Jersey and destroyed draft records in protest of the Vietnam War. On May 22, 1973, the jury, after listening and deliberating over the case for two months, declared each and every one of the defendants not guilty.

Jury nullification also plays an interesting role in our system of checks and balances. Just as the president possesses the power to veto and pardon, the jury is given a veto power as a check on the legislative and judicial branches per United States v. Wilson (1980). [6] However, without jury nullification, the power of the people to act as a check is greatly diminished because the jury would be forced to rigidly apply the law just as the judge would. Jury nullification allows not only for greater flexibility in enforcement of the law, but also evaluates the law in terms of the public values and changing social norms. [7]

This is not to say that jury nullification has not been a controversial topic. What are the arguments against nullification? First, the courts have been outspoken against nullification. The Fourth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals was clear in United States v. Moylan (1969): “By clearly stating to the jury that they may disregard the law, telling them that they may decide according to their prejudices or consciences...we would indeed be negating the rule of law in favor of the rule of lawlessness.” [8] Opponents, such as Judge Harold Leventhal, argue that by allowing jurors to decide which rules they should and should not abide by, nullification diminishes the rule of law and increases the arbitrary application of justice. [9] The Courts have consistently agreed, reinforcing the idea that nullification should not be allowed in courtrooms through United States v. Boardman (1967), United States v. Washington in 1975), United States v. Krzyske (1988), United States v. Sepulveda (1993), and more.

A second argument is that nullification is inefficient at achieving justice. The U.S. District Court of Massachusetts said rather candidly in 2008 that “the notion that nullification will change the law is drivel. Those who would characterize it as a noble form of civil disobedience are deeply delusional.” [10] Instead of promoting societal change through the proper democratic channels, jury nullification circumvents the legislative process and makes every trial a not just an determination of the facts of the case but also a referendum on the law in question. By focusing on short term acquittals, the long term benefit of jury nullification in creating a sustainable system of delivering justice is contested.

Third, there is evidence that nullification is not applied equally. Frequently when jurors are informed of jury nullification, they place less emphasis on evidence and instead direct their focus towards emotional appeal or other factors. [11] Studies indicate that when the judge or defense attorney informed juries of nullification, they were more likely to acquit a sympathetic defendant and judge a dangerous defendant more harshly. [12] Allowing such biases to not only underlie the verdicts of our juries, but also guide them as occurs in nullification, raises serious questions regarding justice and fairness.

Jury nullification is not a law in and of itself, but rather a byproduct of two constitutional guidelines. First, a jury cannot be punished for a “wrong” decision. It is the final arbiter of evidence and for the most part its word is final. Second, a person cannot be retried for a crime they were acquitted of. A functioning democracy with the rule of law requires both of these, and the byproduct is the potential for jury nullification. Nullification is like any other democratic power; while some may try to misuse it, that does not mean it should be revoked. Ultimately we are a nation of laws, but also a nation of people. Our legislators are hardly infallible, as evidenced by the Fugitive Slave Act, Volstead Act, USA PATRIOT Act and other unjust laws. Jury nullification serves an important role in combating injustices, expressing public discontent,promoting just laws, and ensuring the will of the people is respected in all branches of government.

[1] “Jury Nullification” Legal Information Institute. Accessed March 13th 2018. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jury_nullification
[2] Edwin Meese III. “The Meaning of the Constitution” Heritage.org. Accessed March 13th, 2018. https://www.heritage.org/political-process/report/the-meaning-the-constitution
[3] “Sullivan v. Louisiana” Justia.org. Accessed on March 13th, 2018. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/508/275/case.html
[4] “United States v. Spock” Justia.org. Accessed on March 13th, 2018. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/416/165/401712/
[5] Scheflin, Alan & Dyke, Jon. “Jury Nullification: The Contours of a Controversy” Law and Contemporary Problems. Accessed on March 12th, 2018. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3602&context=lcp
[6] “United States v. Wilson” Justia.org. Accessed on March 13th. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/629/439/266223/
[7] Brown, Darryl. “Jury Nullification Within the Rule of Law” 81 Minnesota Law Review 1149 1996-1997. Accessed on March 11th, 2018. http://www.law.virginia.edu/pdf/faculty/hein/brown/81minn_l_rev1149_1997.pdf
[8] “United States v. Moylan” Justia.org. Accessed on March 11th, 2018. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/417/1002/190492/
[9] “United States v. Dougherty” Justia.org. Accessed on March 13th. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/F2/473/1113/226019/
[10] United States v. Luisi, 568 F. Supp. 2d 106 (D. Mass. 2008). Wall Street Journal. Accessed on March 11th, 2018. http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/youngnullification.pdf
[11] Devine, Dennis & D. Clayton, Laura & B. Dunford, Benjamin & Pryce, Jennifer. “Jury Decision Making: 45 Years of Empirical Research On Deliberating Groups” Psychology, Public Policy, and Law. Accessed on March 12th, 2018. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5cf0/c05cf4cf27e3912ecaeddac03d71b01d4532.pdf
[12] Horowitz, Irwin A. “Jury nullification: The impact of judicial instructions, arguments, and challenges on jury decision making” Law and Human Behavior, 12(4), 439-453. Accessed on March 13th, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01044627
Photo Credit: The Times Jonathan Miano 

The opinions and views expressed through this publication are the opinions of the designated authors and do not reflect the opinions or views of the Penn Undergraduate Law Journal, our staff, or our clients.


1 Comment
Daniel Gordon
4/26/2018 12:33:21 am

nice article

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.


    Categories

    All
    Aaron Tsui
    Akshita Tiwary
    Alana Bess
    Alana Mattei
    Albert Manfredi
    Alexander Saeedy
    Alexandra Aaron
    Alexandra Kanan
    Alexandra Kerrigan
    Alice Giannini
    Alicia Augustin
    Alicia Kysar
    Ally Kalishman
    Ally Margolis
    Alya Abbassian
    Amanda Damayanti
    Anika Prakash
    Anna Schwartz
    Arshiya Pant
    Ashley Kim
    Astha Pandey
    Audrey Pan
    Benjamin Ng'aru
    Brónach Rafferty
    Bryce Klehm
    Cary Holley
    Catherine Tang
    Christina Gunzenhauser
    Christine Mitchell
    Christopher Brown
    Clarissa Alvarez
    Cole Borlee
    Connor Gallagher
    Dan Spinelli
    Dan Zhang
    David Katz
    Davis Berlind
    Derek Willie
    Dhilan Lavu
    Edgar Palomino
    Edna Simbi
    Ella Jewell
    Ella Sohn
    Emma Davies
    Esther Lee
    Evelyn Bond
    Filzah Belal
    Frank Geng
    Gabrielle Cohen
    Gabriel Maliha
    Georgia Ray
    Graham Reynolds
    Habib Olapade
    Hailie Goldsmith
    Haley Son
    Hannah Steinberg
    Harshit Rai
    Hennessis Umacta
    Henry Lininger
    Hetal Doshi
    Ingrid Holmquist
    Iris Zhang
    Irtaza Ali
    Isabela Baghdady
    Ishita Chakrabarty
    Jack Burgess
    Jessica "Lulu" Lipman
    Joe Anderson
    Jonathan Lahdo
    Jonathan Stahl
    Joseph Squillaro
    Justin Yang
    Kaitlyn Rentala
    Kanishka Bhukya
    Katie Kaufman
    Kelly Liang
    Keshav Sharma
    Ketaki Gujar
    Khlood Awan
    Lauren Pak
    Lavi Ben Dor
    Libby Rozbruch
    Lindsey Li
    Luis Bravo
    Lyan Casamalhuapa
    Lyndsey Reeve
    Madeline Decker
    Maja Cvjetanovic
    Maliha Farrooz
    Marco DiLeonardo
    Margaret Lu
    Matthew Caulfield
    Michael Keshmiri
    Michael Merolla
    Mina Nur Basmaci
    Muskan Mumtaz
    Natalie Peelish
    Natasha Darlington
    Natasha Kang
    Nathan Liu
    Nayeon Kim
    Nicholas Parsons
    Nicholas Williams
    Nicole Greenstein
    Nicole Patel
    Nihal Sahu
    Omar Khoury
    Owen Voutsinas Klose
    Owen Voutsinas-Klose
    Paula Vekker
    Pheby Liu
    Pragat Patel
    Rachel Bina
    Rachel Gu
    Rachel Pomerantz
    Rebecca Heilweil
    Regina Salmons
    Sajan Srivastava
    Samantha Graines
    Sandeep Suresh
    Sanjay Dureseti
    Sarah Simon
    Saranya Das Sharma
    Saranya Sharma
    Sasha Bryski
    Saxon Bryant
    Sean Foley
    Sebastian Bates
    Serena Camici
    Shahana Banerjee
    Shannon Alvino
    Shiven Sharma
    Siddarth Sethi
    Sneha Parthasarathy
    Sneha Sharma
    Sophie Lovering
    Steven Jacobson
    Suaida Firoze
    Suprateek Neogi
    Takane Shoji
    Tanner Bowen
    Taryn MacKinney
    Thomas Cribbins
    Todd Costa
    Tyler Larkworthy
    Tyler Ringhofer
    Vatsal Patel
    Vikram Balasubramanian
    Vishwajeet Deshmukh
    Wajeeha Ahmad
    Yeonhwa Lee

    Archives

    April 2025
    March 2025
    February 2025
    January 2025
    December 2024
    November 2024
    September 2024
    May 2024
    April 2024
    January 2024
    December 2023
    November 2023
    May 2023
    March 2023
    January 2023
    December 2022
    November 2022
    September 2022
    June 2022
    March 2022
    February 2022
    January 2022
    December 2021
    November 2021
    May 2021
    April 2021
    March 2021
    February 2021
    January 2021
    December 2020
    November 2020
    October 2020
    July 2020
    June 2020
    May 2020
    April 2020
    March 2020
    February 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015
    September 2015
    August 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    August 2014
    July 2014
    June 2014
    May 2014
    April 2014
    March 2014
    December 2013
    November 2013
    October 2013
    September 2013

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.