General Discussion

RainDog

(28,784 posts)

28. Yes. The issue of "state's rights"

Wed May 22, 2013, 04:16 PM

May 2013

is getting a new pov, as well, as Republicans continue to gerrymander districts to give them seats in the legislature when the majority of the population in the U.S. is more liberal than their party.

so we have places that are liberalizing their laws in spite of federal prohibition.

when Frank and Paul had a decriminalization bill in the house last session, Lamar Smith, of Texas, refused to let the bill out of his chambers and it died there.

He has since moved on from the judiciary committee to the Science Committee where he now advocates for politicians to weigh in on scientific research and joins the global climate change deniers.

Our govt. is corrupt and people have to fight against this corruption by whatever means are at their disposal.

During the civil rights era, the federal govt. made it possible to lay a foundation for justice for African-Americans. Now the federal govt. attempts to retain racist law as embodied in the long war on drugs (which has always been a war on minorities.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

80 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

San Diego Mayor Urges Jury Nullification for MJ Dispensary Case [View all] RainDog May 2013 OP

Certainly! Dawson Leery May 2013 #1

Speak it, Brother Filner! Let's nullify marijuana prohibition. Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #2

And thats why the Fully Informed Jury Association exists! www.fija.org TampaAnimusVortex May 2013 #44

this is not SD proper nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #3

Jan Goldsmith is an ASS FreeState May 2013 #21

He is an ass, but I like Mike nadinbrzezinski May 2013 #22

New Hampshire - 2012 RainDog May 2013 #4

What are the charges against Chang? randome May 2013 #5

don't know all the charges RainDog May 2013 #9

Montana - 2010 RainDog May 2013 #6

If you believe that the law is unjust, you wouldnt get on the jury. The prosecutor will ask you rhett o rick May 2013 #7

Looking forward to the day RainDog May 2013 #10

Let's try to convince our Democratic President to back off. nm rhett o rick May 2013 #11

Petitions to back off marijuana prohibition RainDog May 2013 #19

He doesnt have to make a big issue out of it, just tell Holder to back off. I doubt it would be rhett o rick May 2013 #32

Better yet RainDog May 2013 #34

Sorry my point wasnt better presented. If Pres Obama was in favor of letting the states rhett o rick May 2013 #43

The "culture war" issues are where Democrats usually support liberal policy RainDog May 2013 #47

I once saw a judge do exactly that MindPilot May 2013 #12

I guarantee that will happen in this case. But it's not necessary. The prosecutor will always rhett o rick May 2013 #13

True, and you can always answer that in the affirmative. MindPilot May 2013 #16

Agreed. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #20

I agree but the discussion was about "jury nullification". I dont think that's an option. Sure you rhett o rick May 2013 #33

That's a distinction that I don't understand. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #35

If you believe the law is unjust, then you would be lying if you said you could convict. rhett o rick May 2013 #37

"You dont get to choose what reasonable means." Says who? AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #39

What the judge will say is that if the prosecutor proved that the defendant was rhett o rick May 2013 #40

So, in your opinion, the crime has one and only one element? That's not how it works. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #41

"So, in your opinion..." What? Are you telling me what my opinion is? We are way off the original rhett o rick May 2013 #42

And yet there are posts on this thread RainDog May 2013 #48

I would certainly be interested in the specifics. nm rhett o rick May 2013 #50

Jury nullification has a long history in this country, including helping to defeat the Fugitive AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #52

There is a question mark after the sentence because a question is being asked. I'm asking for your AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #49

Part of a judge's instructions may also include jury nullification RainDog May 2013 #56

That sounds wonderful, however, explain how jurors with that in mind get past rhett o rick May 2013 #59

I haven't been on such a jury RainDog May 2013 #63

Reminds me of Juror #8... nikto May 2013 #27

Yep. I saw that happen too. progressoid May 2013 #60

You guess is wrong. former9thward May 2013 #45

Explain how someone gets seated on a jury if they believe the law is unjust. The prosecutor will ask rhett o rick May 2013 #61

Jurors are not questioned by judges about their verdicts. former9thward May 2013 #62

Again, what would a prospective juror (that thinks the law is unjust) say when asked rhett o rick May 2013 #79

Prosecutors don't ask jurors if they think a law is just. former9thward May 2013 #80

At the federal level, the judges commonly ask the questions of prospective jurors, not prosecutors. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #77

Oh snap! nt Poll_Blind May 2013 #8

Colorado - 2012 RainDog May 2013 #14

When will Bob Filner understand how in truedelphi May 2013 #15

And damnation to we lesser proles for electing him! MindPilot May 2013 #17

I am very glad to hear about him. truedelphi May 2013 #29

Cannabis legalization is a winning issue RainDog May 2013 #31

Because I'm a fair and open minded person, I would like to volunteer for jury duty. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #18

Southerners have engaged in jury nullification on and off for years. Failing to convict a white byeya May 2013 #23

Yes. The issue of "state's rights" RainDog May 2013 #28

+ + - You tied it together nicely. byeya May 2013 #30

Jury nullification began much earlier in the North when juries refused to convict under the Fugitive AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #53

Ed Burns, Dennis Lehane, George Pelecanos, Richard Price, David Simon and William F. Zorzi Jr RainDog May 2013 #24

I would nullify in a heartbeat. (nt) Nye Bevan May 2013 #25

best vote i've ever cast in my lifetime frylock May 2013 #26

NYTimes: Jurors Can Say No RainDog May 2013 #36

So smoking a little weed warrants trashing the first amendment. I wonder what Geo.Washington byeya May 2013 #38

The War on Drugs was the precursor of the War on Terror RainDog May 2013 #46

Good for him! gopiscrap May 2013 #51

The DOJ guidelines for the discretionary enforcement of the law can be found here: AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #54

thanks for the link RainDog May 2013 #55

That prospect terrifies me. Juries should always apply the law. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #57

It is part of our judicial system's practices RainDog May 2013 #58

They did vote to change it. We don't get to vote on what the feds do CBGLuthier May 2013 #66

Nullification is a bug, not a feature. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #67

So you think people should've been convicted for harboring runaway slaves? RainDog May 2013 #68

I think that it should have been made legal to do so. N.T. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #70

But it wasn't. That's the point RainDog May 2013 #72

It also lets criminals walk free, and sends innocent people to jail. Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #73

Adhering to current law also lets criminals walk free and sends innocent people to jail RainDog May 2013 #75

Jury nullification never "sends innocent people to jail." AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #76

rather a bit of a strident viewpoint for a progressive board CBGLuthier May 2013 #69

What, that juries should uphold the law? I'm sorry you think that's "strident". Donald Ian Rankin May 2013 #71

Sometimes laws deserve not to be upheld. Comrade Grumpy May 2013 #74

Please see #76. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #78

WE get the Jury Trial from Magna Carta England Savannahmann May 2013 #64

There are times RainDog May 2013 #65