In pardoning Arpaio, Trump has given a free pass to an unrepentant and habitual abuser of power, a man with insufficient regard for the Constitution he swore to uphold or the separation of powers it enshrines. The move should come as no surprise. The two are kindred spirits.
Arpaio is not facing six months behind bars for "enforcing the law" or "working to keep people safe," any more than drug dealers are sentenced to prison for "making people happy." Arpaio disregarded a judge's order and was convicted of felony contempt of court. He did the crime, by his own logic and that of the U.S. Attorney General, and he should now do some time.
Think of it as jury nullification. Do that and get a box of tissues. Trump just nullified a law he disagreed with. You should be cheering. But you're dumb.
Think of it as jury nullification. Do that and get a box of tissues. Trump just nullified a law he disagreed with. You should be cheering. But you're dumb.
Jury nulliication only applies to laws HE disagrees with.
Jury nulliication only applies to laws HE disagrees with.
Jury nullification applies to laws THE JURY disagrees with and it needs to be wielded a WHOLE LOT MORE on a daily basis in this law-encrusted nation.
Fvck Big Stupid Government. Too many laws to waste our lives buying lobbyists to repeal, so start ignoring them by the thousands, join FIJA, spread the word and nullify them.
Thanks for the link. I downloaded: http://www.fija.org/docs/JG_Jurors_Handbook.pdf; it is a good discussion.
FIJA's been around a long time and they know what they're doing.
As more and more Americans get fed up with Big Stupid Government's bullshit, I'm betting you'll see more and more juries telling BSG to shove it right up their baracks.
I'm betting you'll see more and more juries telling BSG
Well, that means if the accused truly gets a jury of his peers, he can never be convicted, right?
No matter the crime -- say, rape -- fill the jury with rapists and he walks. Child molestation? Boom! Grand theft auto? Ta-ta! Embezzlement? Goodbye.
None of those jurists believe the law for their crime is fair and just. But you're saying they should vote their conscience rather than the rule of law set by society.