280
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2023
280 points (99.3% liked)
politics
19087 readers
3582 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
So is it at all possible the judge could nullify this possibility? Or because juror selection for Trump’s trial hasn’t commenced they’ll be trying to blanket the entirety of the nation in hopes they can get anyone I guess.
It is possible that the jury could be instructed to report on whether any jurors were not deliberating honestly, or refusing to participate.
I’m not a lawyer, but have read a bunch about nullification, and it’s an interestingly powerful and simple cheat code in the hands of a juror who otherwise behaves normally during voir dire, the trial, and deliberations.
Because it’s so powerful, the justice system pretty much hates citizens knowing about it. Aggressive steps are often taken to remove protesters who try to make jurors aware of nullification, to the point of violating free-speech rights imo.
If a juror goes full John-Grisham-novel-style, and hides their intent to nullify, and they don’t have a findable personal history that clearly conflicts with what they said during voir dire, there isn’t anything the justice system can do to stop that juror from completely ratfucking the government’s case.
And, there would be extraordinary benefits to doing so. A single juror who nullified the government’s case would become a multimillionaire in short order, and they would be a massive hero to 30% of America.
It’s disturbing to think about.