Jury Power Quotes
This is a very important and fundamental quotation. Jefferson, John Adams, John Jay and many other Founding Fathers told us that the jury of peers was the final arbiter of a court case. However, many modern judges and legislatures have tried to erode that principle. In most states judges instructs juries that they are the final arbiter of the facts but he/she is the final arbiter of the law and how it should be applied in the case. But the founders wanted the jury to be the final arbiters of the law as well as the facts as is illustrated here and in {640588} and {640589}. For a more modern concurring view, see {640590}
This is a very important and fundamental quotation. Jefferson, John Adams, John Jay and many other Founding Fathers told us that the jury of peers was the final arbiter of a court case. However, many modern judges and legislatures have tried to erode that principle. In most states judges instructs juries that they are the final arbiter of the facts but he/she is the final arbiter of the law and how it should be applied in the case. But the founders wanted the jury to be the final arbiters of the law as well as the facts as is illustrated here and in {640587} and {640589}. For a more modern concurring view, see {640590}.
Jury nullification is when the jury believes that the defendant has committed the crime alleged, but acquits anyway because it believes the law is wrong or the defendant acted properly or justly. Most trial judges detest the concept and often tell the jury that they may not engage in the practice. However, there is a long American tradition of jury nullification dating back to colonial America. This quotation shows one of the negative aspects of nullification. See {640833}.
Ever since that decision was written, lawmakers, judges and attorneys have worked very hard to minimize its impact and allow the jury to only decide on the facts and not the law. Only Maryland today preserves the right of the jury to decide what the law means and to judge it. Authorities, even democratic ones, do all they can to prevent what is called “jury nullification”. Regardless, juries often exercise that right regardless of the judge’s instructions.
This principle that the jury may, if it chooses, decide on the law and not neccessarily follow the Judges instructions on the law was held by John Adams and John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, as well as political and judicial leaders throughout American History. But in the 20th century the Judiciary and many legeslatures has tried to restrict taht freedom of the Juries. At the beginning of the 21st Century, the only state whose laws explictly followed that practice was Maryland, and even there, very few judges ever informed juries that they could override or ignore him on matters of law.
