Blocks JN - AT NEG AT Jury null is unchecked 1 False There...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
AT NEG AT Jury null is unchecked 1. False: There is an internal check which is there needs to be unanimity among the jurors, so they internally check one another. 2. False: The judges can remove the jurors in order to check them 3. This is impact is negligible in jury nullification cases since they would only be over settting a morally egregious harm 4. This is infinitely regressive since there will eventually lead to some tool not being checked. 5. The government is a tool itself, as such we aer just using a tool to check a tool, even if there ar tools with checking jnull, it is still useful as it reatinas an ability to check the government 6. Turn: Checking juries is bad because if undermines jury indepence since it essentially undermines their position as arbiters of the decision if it can be revoked. 7. There is no analysis on what a check actually means, as such the framework is underdeveloped. Better Answers 1) First, juries are checked – they have the internal check of unanimity. All people on the jury have to agree to convict someone. 2) Second, juries have external checks – for instance, the judge can remove jurors if the judge thinks they’re biased. 3) Third, the impact doesn’t follow. Nobody actually knows when the jury nullifies, juries don’t nullify that often, and thus, they don’t set a bad precedent when they do nullify. 4) Fourth, the impact is non-unique because jury nullification doesn’t actually change the law, so there’s no reason why we need to impose extra checks on juries. 5) Fifth, TURN: Checking the jury is bad because it undermines the jury’s independence. Jury independence is necessary for a functional democracy, else the state is trying you for violating the state’s laws, rather than having relatively objective individuals try you for that crime. AT JN is Undermocratic 1. juries are more participatory (all indvs. get to be on it)
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
2. Turn: sparks discourse 3. No consensus on what it means to be undemocratic 4. Stoopping racism is not undemocratic 5. It is constitutional, so its prolly democratic Better answers 1. TURN: Juries are incredibly democratic since every individual gets to serve on them periodically and thus individuals can be directly engaged in law-making when we use nullification. 2. TURN: Jury selection is randomized and designed so that the jury isn’t bias, i.e. favoring any one belief, so juries equally represent what all people think, accurately reflecting their views, which is inherently democratic. 3. TURN: Democracy only functions when minority rights are protected, which ensures equal participation. Jury nullification prevents the perpetuation of unjust laws and thus protects minority rights. 4.
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 14

Blocks JN - AT NEG AT Jury null is unchecked 1 False There...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online