Analysis of jury nullification as a form of civil disobedience

The role of the American juror has been continuously redefined with Supreme Court decisions establishing the legal parameters of a juror's responsibility in the courtroom. Progressive judicial rulings have acknowledged the power of a juror to judge not only the facts of a case, but also the law. This power is manifested in jury nullification, where a jury acquits a defendant if the facts do not support a guilty verdict, if the law does not apply to the specific case, if the law is applied arbitrarily, or if the punishment is too severe for the crime. Jury nullification has become a controversial and an influential component of the legal system, since it contests the instituted courtroom norms. As a type of civil disobedience, jury nullification is a non-violent means of retaliation against authority, as it challenges the legal system. Utilizing various theoretical perspectives on jury behavior, analyzing Supreme Court decisions, and looking at the lineage of jury nullification, this paper explores the phenomenon of jury nullification.