A proposition idea to help save California (San Francisco: fit in, law)

[armourereric]

The legal concept of Jury Nullification Shall be a lawful and legally accepted option available to all California empaneled juries for purposes of deliberation. Further ALL juries SHALL be informed of this option upon receiving final instructions

I have always enjoyed studying the US Constitution, and upon discovering the concept of jury nullification and how important it's application was to the founding fathers, then the disappointment of it's systematic demise in the 1880's, I thought of how it could of benefit in states where the size of government is out of control. California once utilized this concept, but is one of the few states whose Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional (IIEC, 5 states require that juries be allowed the option to practice nullification by constitution).

Please discuss. I will try, after work to provide links to source material.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Need more info to give input, though sounds interesting.

[shooting4life]

The law is on trial just as much as the defendant.

Paraphrasing a Supreme Court justice who's name I cannot remember.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by armourereric

The legal concept of Jury Nullification Shall be a lawful and legally accepted option available to all California empaneled juries for purposes of deliberation. Further ALL juries SHALL be informed of this option upon receiving final instructions

I have always enjoyed studying the US Constitution, and upon discovering the concept of jury nullification and how important it's application was to the founding fathers, then the disappointment of it's systematic demise in the 1880's, I thought of how it could of benefit in states where the size of government is out of control. California once utilized this concept, but is one of the few states whose Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional (IIEC, 5 states require that juries be allowed the option to practice nullification by constitution).

Please discuss. I will try, after work to provide links to source material.

A complicated subject, but ultimately, we are a nation ruled by laws, and I am not keen on people being allowed to ignore those laws when it suits them.

The legislature is elected, the D.A is elected, and the Sheriff is elected. I think that is enough, if society has a problem with a law, they have recourse.

[Curmudgeon]

I can understand its demise. In this day-and-age I think it would fly in the face of the equal protection clause. Juries in significantly liberal areas would likely have more of a tendency to apply it than juries in conservative areas. Simplistically, coastal and metropolitan juries would favor it over inland, more rural areas. That could lead a lot of defendants petitioning to have their trials moved to, say, San Francisco. Of course, I suppose the opposite might hold sway in areas with extremely anti-government sentiments. Also, the people have the right to make or break statutes through the proposition/initiative process. Therefore, juries need only be "finders of fact."

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

I can understand its demise. In this day-and-age I think it would fly in the face of the equal protection clause. Juries in significantly liberal areas would likely have more of a tendency to apply it than juries in conservative areas. Simplistically, coastal and metropolitan juries would favor it over inland, more rural areas. That could lead a lot of defendants petitioning to have their trials moved to, say, San Francisco. Of course, I suppose the opposite might hold sway in areas with extremely anti-government sentiments. Also, the people have the right to make or break statutes through the proposition/initiative process. Therefore, juries need only be "finders of fact."

I'm pretty sure those lynchings in the south were in conservative areas.

[pch1013]

I have another idea. Just four little words: Ban paid signature gathering.

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by zombocom

I'm pretty sure those lynchings in the south were in conservative areas.

Apropos of what? I was talking now, not 60 to 80 years ago.

[zombocom]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

Apropos of what? I was talking now, not 60 to 80 years ago.

Yes, but your statement is an opinion, whereas I cited conservatives actually disregarding the law and legal process.

Originally Posted by pch1013

I have another idea. Just four little words: Ban paid signature gathering.

Amen, the proposition system is ruining the state (or at least playing a large role in the ruination of this state).

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by zombocom

Yes, but your statement is an opinion, whereas I cited conservatives actually disregarding the law and legal process.

Rather non sequiter but I'm not going to argue with you. You enjoy it too much.

Originally Posted by zombocom

Amen, the proposition system is ruining the state (or at least playing a large role in the ruination of this state).

That you and I can agree upon. Having worked in the state political system I've been saying the same thing for years. The unfunded mandates and bad statutes propositions have spawned have not served the state well at all.