What is Jury Nullification

[Keith Broaders]

ury Nullification is the process by which a jury in a criminal trial acquits a defendant—even if the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt—because the jury believes the law itself is unjust, immoral, or should not be applied in that particular case.

Key Points:

• Not an official power: Jury nullification is not a legal right written into law; it's a de facto power that arises from two core principles of the justice system:
  1. Juries deliver a general verdict ("guilty" or "not guilty") without having to justify their reasoning.
  2. Double jeopardy prevents the government from retrying a defendant after an acquittal.
• Historical examples:
  • Pre-Civil War U.S.: Northern juries often acquitted abolitionists charged with violating the Fugitive Slave Act.
  • Prohibition era: Juries frequently refused to convict people for alcohol-related offenses.
  • Modern cases: Occasionally used in drug possession cases where jurors disagree with mandatory minimum sentences.
• Judges and lawyers: Courts generally do not instruct juries about nullification. In fact, defense attorneys can be sanctioned for explicitly urging it, and judges may remove jurors who admit they’d nullify.
• Controversial: Supporters see it as a safeguard against tyrannical laws; critics argue it undermines the rule of law and can lead to inconsistent justice (e.g., racially biased acquittals).

In short: The jury can’t be punished for acquitting, even if they ignore the law. This makes nullification a rare but real check on government power—though it’s unpredictable and not officially endorsed.