Anyway, as I understand it, our JURYS are supposed to take care of unjust laws by not enforcing them. (Like that is going to happen any time soon.)
Re: JURYS are supposed to take care of unjust laws
IF, IF the jury is not intimidated by the court ....
This from the US Department of Justice (USDOJ):
40.03[11] Jury Nullification
“Jury nullification” is the concept that a jury has the right to ignore a judge’s instructions on the law, if it feels the law is unjust, and acquit the defendant even if the government has proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Tax defiers have argued that the authors of the Bill of Rights intended the Sixth Amendment to incorporate such a right. There is, however, no constitutional right to a jury nullification instruction. United States v. Powell, 955 F.2d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 1992); United States v. Krzyske, 836 F.2d 1013, 1021 (6th Cir. 1988) (upholding court’s response to jury’s inquiry about meaning of “jury nullification” that “[t]here is no such thing as valid jury nullification. Your obligation is to follow the instructions of the court as to the law given to you”); United States v. Drefke, 707 F.2d 978, 982 (8th Cir. 1983); United States v. Buttorff, 572 F.2d 619, 627 (8th Cir. 1978). See also United States v. Dougherty, 473 F.2d 1113, 1130-1137 (D.C. Cir. 1972), for a thorough discussion of the issue of jury nullification and its historical origins.
THIS IS WHAT YOU FACE IN COURT OR WHILE SERVING ON A JURY.