You write as though it's a simple thing to judge a law unconstitutional. If it was that simple and obvious when a law was unconstitutional, we wouldn't really need the Supreme Court, would we?
you still would vote to convict???
I would vote according to the law and the evidence presented at trial. That's what jurors are sworn to do, and I would do my best to keep that oath.
Could you kindly show my in the Constitution where a juror is given the authority to do anything else? ...or where a juror is granted authority to disregard or effectively modify the law?
seems like you are giving up a lot of power of teh people and giving it BLINDLY to judges and politicians.
If that power is a bad thing, then you have a problem with the Constitution. The people GRANT that power to "judges and politicians" because that's what the Constitution has established.
YOU have the JURY power to stop conviction of folks for bad laws.
Bad laws, according to WHOM? There's no universal definition of "bad law". That's exactly the problem!
If EVERYONE agrees that it's a "bad law", then getting it changed in the legislature should be at least possible, even if difficult.
just wait until we get more obama type Un-constitutional laws. you might change your tune.
I can hate the laws without trashing the process.
We all agree that congress creates a lot of junk. But we DON'T all agree on which ones ARE junk.
A juror has the sworn, moral duty to apply the law to the evidence and reach a decision. If he ignores the law of the land, substituting his OWN law, then he has violated his sacred oath and is no better than a judge who substitutes HIS own law.
well we have a supreme court, once said slavery was legal, guess if you where teh slave you would be all right with that, and wait for someone to change the law in congress eventually. meanwhile get picking that cotton, the wheels of congress are turning, maybe one day they will correct the law.
is not the jury there to correct bad law? or is bad law ok with you, You can wait until the politicans fix it. meanwhile someone is rotting in jail.
no thanks. if you think it is right ot put a man in jail for a bad un-consitituional law, then you are a tryant, an immoral tyrant. we cannot lock up people and hope the bad laws are fixed later. the jury is your chance to right these wrongs. i swear to uphold the constitution as the highest law, not some law the legislature or judge came up with. if there is a conflict in my eyes, i go with teh Constitution.
Obama and the liberals need more jurors like you. ones that dont regard the Constitution as anymore than an old document. Jurors that blindly follow what liberal constitution hating politicans have to say about law.
heck to turn it around on you, why have a jury, we got a supreme court, let judges decide your fate????