More on jury nullification, this time from Pandagon

I’m a day late to catch this post Amanda did on the The Wire, the black hole we call the “the War on Drugs,” and jury nullification. Neither did I see this Time article by Burns, Lehane, Pelecanos, Price and Simon. I’m on my lunch hour without time to flesh any of this out but I wanted to put it up since we usually have some decent discussions on Friday, and jury nullification has come up a couple of times recently.



  1. In Time, it’s basically a call to action. The one thing we *can* do: “If asked to serve on a jury deliberating a violation of state or federal drug laws, we will vote to acquit, regardless of the evidence presented. Save for a prosecution in which acts of violence or intended violence are alleged, we will — to borrow Justice Harry Blackmun’s manifesto against the death penalty — no longer tinker with the machinery of the drug war. No longer can we collaborate with a government that uses nonviolent drug offenses to fill prisons with its poorest, most damaged and most desperate citizens. ”

    I’m in.

  2. Be careful, Professor. Jury nullification is not a crime, but lying to get on a jury under false pretenses and or announcing your intention to nullify is contempt of court which could result in a fine or jail time.

  3. They used jury nullification during Jim Crow too. Wasn’t such a good thing then.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Comments RSS