This article delves into the nuanced concept of jury nullification within the context of the U.S. criminal justice process. Commencing with a thorough historical overview, the narrative traces the evolution of jury nullification, spotlighting pivotal cases that have shaped its trajectory. The legal foundation and constraints governing this phenomenon are scrutinized, examining the delicate balance
Juries have the implicit power to acquit defendants despite evidence and judicial instructions to the contrary. This power, called jury nullification, is embedded in the jury’s right to return a verdict by its own moral compass and has historically permitted sympathetic juries to acquit those whom the jurors perceive as legally guilty but morally upright.
Juries have the implicit power to acquit defendants despite evidence and judicial instructions to the contrary. This power, called jury nullification, is embedded in the jury’s right to return a verdict by its own moral compass and has historically permitted sympathetic juries to acquit those whom the jurors perceive as legally guilty but morally upright.