Jury Nullification Allows Juries to Acquit Against the Law

In a courtroom, jurors are instructed to be impartial finders of fact, applying the law as the judge explains it. However, they possess a deep-rooted, albeit unmentioned, power to go a step further and judge the law itself. This allows a jury to return a "not guilty" verdict even when the evidence clearly shows the defendant broke the law. They may do so if they believe the law is unjust or its application in a particular case would be inequitable. This acts as a final, human check on the power of the state, placing the community's conscience above the literal text of a statute.

This power has a storied history, tracing its roots to landmark cases that shaped civil liberties. A foundational example is the 1735 trial of publisher John Peter Zenger in colonial New York. Charged with seditious libel for criticizing the royal governor, Zenger was factually guilty under the law at the time. His lawyer famously bypassed the judge and urged the jury to reject what